LIBRARY  OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 

AT  URBANA-CHAMPAICN 


270,2 
P41s 


Classics 


The  person  charging  this  material  is  re- 
sponsible for  its  return  to  the  library  from 
which  it  was  withdrawn  on  or  before  the 
Latest  Date  stamped  below. 

Theft,    mutilation,    and    underlining    of    books    are    reasons 
for    disciplinary    action    and    may    result   in    dismissal    from 
the  University. 
To  renew  call  Telephone  Center,  333-8400 

UNIVERSITY    OF    ILLINOIS    LIBRARY    AT    URBANA-CHAMPAIGN 


'OCT  2  5  1982 


•      7  ^ii- 


DEC 

Mr] 
AUG  *S  ^ 

APR  i 


L161— O-1096 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2012  with  funding  from 

University  of  Illinois  Urbana-Champaign 


http://archive.org/details/sevenecumenicalcOOperc 


A    SELECT     LIBRARY 


NICENE    AND    POST-NICENE    FATHERS 


THE   CHRISTIAN   CHURCH. 

J&econti  Series. 

TRANSLATED  INTO  ENGLISH  WITH  PROLEGOMENA  AND  EXPLANATORY  NOTES. 


VOLUME    XIV. 

THE    SEVEN    ECUMENICAL    COUNCILS    OF   THE   UNDIVIDED    CHURCH. 


OXFORD: 

JAMES    PARKER   AND    COMPANY. 

NEW     YORK: 

THE    CHRISTIAN    LITERATURE    COMPANY. 
M  DCCCC. 


ENTERED   AT   STATIONERS'    HALL. 


Printed  by  Messrs.  James  Parker  &  Co.  at  their 
Printing  Office,  Crown  Yard,  Cornmarket  Street,  Oxford. 


Pi-  is. 


THE  SEVEN  ECUMENICAL  COUNCILS 

OF  THE   UNDIVIDED  CHURCH. 
THEIR  CANONS   AND    DOGMATIC   DECREES, 

TOGETHER   WITH   THE   CANONS  OF   ALL  THE    LOCAL   SYNODS   WHICH 
HAVE   RECEIVED   ECUMENICAL  ACCEPTANCE. 


EDITED    WITH  NOTES   GATHERED  FROM  THE    WRITINGS    OF  THE 
GREATEST  SCHOLARS 


BY 

HENRY    R.   PERCIVAL,    M.A.,    D.D. 


r^oj  224 


a  2 


CONTENTS 


Preface, •  .       vn 

General  Introduction, xi 

1.  Method  of  Treatment,  xi. 

2.  Concerning  Ecumenical  Councils  in  General,  xi. 

3.  The  Number  of  the  Ecumenical  Synods,  xv. 

Biographical  Introduction, xvii 

Appended  Note  on  the  Eastern  Editions  of  Synodical  Literature, xxiii 

A  Bibliographical  Index  of  the  Printed  Editions  of  the  Canons  of  the  Apostles  and 

of  the  Councils  in  the  Slavonic  and  Russian  Languages, xxiii,  xxv 

Excursus  on  the  History  of  the  Roman  Law  and  its  Relation  to  the  Canon  Law,  .        .    xxix 


The    First    Ecumenical    Council  —  The 

First  Council  of  Nice,  a.d.  325,      .        .  1 

Historical  Introduction,      ....  2 

The  Nicene  Creed, 3 

Excursus  ou  the  Word  Homousios,    .         .  3 
Excursus  on  the  Words  yew-qbei/To.  6v  -noiri- 

Srtvra,         .  .  ....        4 

The  Canons  of  318  Holy  Fathers  assembled 

in  the  City  of  Nice,  in  Bithynia,     .        .       8 
Excursus  on  the  Use  of  the  word  "  Canon,"      9 
Excursus  on  the  Word  -npoafytpetv,      .        .     13 
Excursus  on  the  Extent  of  the  Jurisdiction 
of  the  Bishop  of  Rome  over  the  Suburbi- 

carian  Churches, 16 

Excursus  on  the  Rise  of  the  Patriarchate  of 

Jerusalem, 18 

Excursus  on  the  Chorepiscopi,  .        ..21 
Excursus  ou  the  Public  Discipline  or  Ex- 

omologesis  of  the  Early  Church,     .         .     25 
Excursus    on    the    Communion    of    the 

Sick, 30 

Excursus  on  the  Translation  of  Bishops,  .     33 

Excursus  on  Usury, 36 

Excursus  on  the  Deaconess  of  the  Early 

Church, 41 

Excursus  on  the  Number  of  the  Nicene 

Canons, .43 

The  Captions  of  the  Arabic  Canons  Attrib- 
uted to  the  Council  of  Nice,    .        .        .46 
Proposed  Action  ou  Clerical  Celibacy,       .     51 

The  Synodal  Letter, 53 

Excursus  on  the  Subsequent  History  of  the 
Eastern  Question, 55 


II.  The  Canons  of  the  Councils  of  Ancy- 
ra,  Gangra,  Neocesarea,  Antioch  and 
Laodicea  —  Which  Canons  were  Ac- 
cepted and  Received  by  the  Ecumeni- 
cal Synods, 58 

Introductory  Note  to  the  Canons  of  Pro- 
vincial Synods, 59 

i.  The  Council  of  Ancyra,  a.d.  314 — Histor- 
ical Note, 61-62 

The  Canons  of  the  Council  of  Ancyra,       .     63 
Excursus    on    Second    Marriages,   Called 

Digamy, .72 

ii.  The  Council  of  Neocsesarea  c.  a.d.  315 — 

Historical  Note,        ....        77-78 
The  Canons  of  the  Holy  and  Blessed  Fath- 
ers who  Assembled  at  Neocsesarea,        .     79 


iii.  The  Council  of  Gangra,  a.d.  325-381 -His- 
torical Introduction 

Synodical  Letter  of  the  Council  of  Gangra. 

The  Canons  of  the  Holy  Fathers  Assembled 
at  Gangra,       ...... 

iv.   The  Synod  of  Antioch  in  Encamiis — a.d. 
341 

Historical  Introduction,      .... 

The  Synodal  Letter,   .  . 

The  Canons  of  the  Blessed  and  Holy  Fath- 
ers Assembled  at  Antioch  in  Syria, 
v.  Synod  of  Laodicea,  a.d.  343-381, 

Historical  Introduction,     .... 

The  Canons  of  the  Synod  held  in  the  City 
of  Laodicea,  in  Phrygia  Pacatiana, 

Excursus  on  the  Choir  Offices  of  the  Early 
Church, 134 

Excursus  on  the  Worship  of  the  Early 
Church,  .         • 136 

Excursus  on  the  Vestments  of  the  Early 
Church, "141 

Excursus  on  the  Minor  Orders  of  the  Early 
Church, \  144 


91 

92 

104 
105 
107 

108 
123 
124 

125 


III.  The  Second  Ecumenical  Council — The 
First  Council  of  Constantinople,  a.d. 

381, 

Historical  Introduction,     .... 
The  Holy  Creed  which  the  150  Fathers  set 

forth,  which  is  Consonant  with  the  Holy 

and  Great  Synod  of  Nice, 
Historical  Excursus  on  the   Introduction 

into  the  Creed  of  the  Words  "and  the 

Son," , 

Historical  Note  on  the  Lost  "  Tome "  of 

the  Second  Council 

Letter  of  the  Same   Holy  Synod    to   the 

Most   Pious    Emperor    Theodosius   the 

Great,  to  which  are  Appended  the  Can- 
ons Enacted  by  Them,    • 
Introduction  on  the  Number  of  the  Canons. 
Canons  of  the  150  Fathers  who  Assembled 

at  Constantinople 

Excursus  on  the  Heresies  Condemned  in 

Canon  I. 

Warning  to  the  Reader  Touching  Canon 

VII 

Excursus  on  the  Authority  of  the  Second 

Ecumenical  Council,        .... 
The  Council  of  Constantinople,  a.d.  382 — 

The  Synodical  Letter,     .... 


161 
162 


163 


165 
169 


170 
171 


172 
184 
186 
189 


CONTENTS 


PAGE 

IV.  The  Thied  Ecumenical  Council— The 
Council  of  Ephesus,  a.d.  431,  .  .  .  191 
Historical  Introduction,  ....  192 
Note  on  the  Emperor's  Edict  to  the  Synod.  196 
Extracts  from  the  Acts — Session  I. ,  .  .  197 
The  Epistle  of  Cyril  to  Nestorius,  .  .  197 
Extracts  from  the  Acts — Session  I.  (con- 
tinued),    199 

Historical    Introduction    to     St.    Cyril's 

Anathematisms, 199 

The  Epistle  of  Cyril  to  Nestorius  with  the 

XII.  Anathematisms,       ....  201 
The  Anathematisms  of  St.  Cyril  Against 

Nestorius, 206 

Excursus  on  the  Word  QsotSkos,        .        .  206 
Excursus  on  How  Our  Lord  Worked  Mira- 
cles,   215 

Extracts  from  the  Acts — Session  I.  (Con- 
tinued)  218 

Decree  of  the  Council  Against  Nestorius,  .  218 
Extracts  from  the  Acts — Session  II.,  .  219 
The  Letter  of  Pope  Coelestine  to  the  Synod 

of  Ephesus, 220 

Extracts  from  the  Acts — Session  II.  (Con- 
tinued),     222 

Extracts  from  the  Acts — Session  III.,  .  223 
The  Canons  of  the  200  Holy  and  Blessed 

Fathers  Who  Met  at  Ephesus,         .         .  225 
Excursus  on  the  Conciliabulum  of  John  of 

Antioch, 226 

Excursus  on  Pelagianism,  ....  229 
Observation  of  the  Roman  Editors  (Ed. 

1608), 231 

Observation  of  Philip  Labbe,  S.  J.  P.,        .  231 
Excursus  on  the  Words  irianv  krcpav,        .  232 
The  Letter  of  the  Same  Holy  Synod  of 
Ephesus  to  the  Sacred  Synod  in  Pamphy- 
lia  Concerning  Eustathius  who  had  been 
Their  Metropolitan,        .         .        .        .236 
The  Letter  of  the  Synod  to  Pope  Celestine.  237 
The  Definition  of  the  Holy  and  Ecumenical 
Synod  of  Ephesus  Against  the  Impious 
Messaliaus,  who  are  also  Called  Euchetse 

and  Enthusiasts, 240 

Note  on  the  Messalians  or  Massalians,       .  240 
Decree  of  the  Synod  in  the  Matter  of  Eu- 
prepius  and  Cyril,  .        .  .        .  242 


V."  The  Fourth  Ecumenical  Council— The 
Council  of  Chalcedon,  a.d.  451,  .  .  243 
General  Introduction,  ....  244 
Extracts  from  the  Acts — Session  I.,  .  .  247 
Extracts  from  the  Acts — Session  II. ,  .  248 
The  Letter  of  Cyril  to  John  of  Antioch,  .  251 
Extracts  from  the  Acts — Session  II.  (con- 
tinued),     253 

The  Tome  of  St.  Leo,        .        .        .        .254 
Extracts  from  the  Acts — Session  II.  (con- 
tinued), III., 259 

The  Condemnation  Sent  by  the  Holy  and 

Ecumenical  Synod  to  Dioscorus,  .  .  260 
Extracts  from  the  Acts— Session  IV. ,  .  260 
Extracts  from  the  Acts — Session  V.,  .  261 
The  Definition  of  Faith  of  the  Council  of 

Chalcedon, 262 

Extracts  from  the  Acts — Session  VI.,        .  265 
Decree  on  the  Jurisdiction  of  Jerusalem 

and  Antioch, 266 

The  Decree  with  Regard  to  the  Bishop  of 
Ephesus — Session  XII.,  ....  266 


Decree  with  Regard  to  Nicomedia — Ses- 
sion XIII., 267 

The  XXX.  Canons  of  the  Holy  and  Fourth 
Synod  of  Chalcedon,       .        .        .         .267 

Excursus  on  the  Later  History  of  Canon 
XXVIII. , .288 

Extracts  from  the  Acts — Session  XVI.,     .  292 

VI.  The  Fifth  Ecumenical  Council — The 
Second  Council  of  Constantinople,  a.d. 
553, 297 

Historical  Introduction,  ....  299 
Excursus  on  the  Genuineness  of  the  Acts 

of  the  Fifth  Council,  .  .  .  .301 
Extracts  from  the  Acts — Session  I.,  .  .  302 
Extracts  from  the  Acts — Session  VII.,  .  304 
The  Sentence  of  the  Synod,  .  .  .306 
The  Capitula  of  the  Council,  .  .  .312 
Excursus  on  the  XV.  Anathemas  Against 

Origen,   . 316 

The  Anathemas  Against  Origen,        .        .318 
The  Anathematisms  of  the  Emperor  Jus- 
tinian Against  Origen,     ....  320 
The  Decretal  Epistle  of  Pope  Vigilius  in 
Confirmation  of  the  Fifth  Ecumenical 

Synod, 321 

Historical  Excursus  on  the  After  History 
of  the  Council, 323 

VII.  The  Sixth  Ecumenical  Council — The 
Third  Council  of  Constantinople,  a.d. 
680-681, 325 

Historical  Introduction,     ....  326 
Extracts  from  the  Acts — Session  I.,  .        .  327 
The  Letter  of  Agatho,  Pope  of  Old  Rome, 
to  the  Emperor,  and  the  Letter  of  Agatho 
and  of  125  Bishops  of  the  Roman  Synod, 
Addressed  to  the  Sixth  Council,     .        .  328 

Introductory  Note 328 

The  Letter  of  Pope  Agatho,       .        .        .328 
The  Letter  of  Pope  Agatho  and  of  the  Ro- 
man Synod  of  125  Bishops  which  was  to 
Serve  as  an  Instruction  to  the  Legates 
Sent  to  Attend  the  Sixth  Synod,     .        .  340 
Extracts  from  the  Acts — Session  VIII.,     .  342 
The  Sentence  Against  the  Monothelites — 

Session  XIII 342 

Extracts  from  the  Acts — Session  XVI.,  .  343 
The  Definition  of  Faith,  .  .  .  .344 
The  Prosphoneticus  to  the  Emperor,  .  347 
Letter  of  the  Council  to  St.  Agatho,  .  .  349 
Excursus  on  the  Condemnation  of  Pope 

Honorius, 351 

The  Imperial  Edict  Posted  in  the  Third 
Atrium  of  the  Great  Church,  near  what 
is  Called  the  Dicymbala,        .        .        .  353 

VIII.  The  Canons  of  the  Council  in  Trullo  : 
Often  Called  The  Quinisext  Council, 
a.d.  692, 355 

Introductory  Note, 356 

The  Canons  of  the  Council  in  Trullo,  .  359 
Excursus  on  the  Marriage  of  the  Clergy,  .  365 

IX.  The  Canons  of  the  Synods  of  Sar- 
dica,  Carthage,  Constantinople,  and 
Carthage  Under  St.  Cyprian,  which 
Canons  were  Received  by  the  Council 

in  Trullo  and  Ratified  by  Nice  II. ,     .  409 
Introductory  Note,     .        ,        .        .        .  410 


CONTENTS 


i.  The  Council  of  Sardica,  a.d.  343  or  344,   .  411 
Introduction  on  the  Date  of  the  Council,  413 
Note  on  the  Text  of  the  Canons,    .        .  414 
The  Canons  of  the  Council  of  Sardica,  .  415 
Excursus  as  to  Whether  the    Sardica 
Council  was  Ecumenical,    .        .        .  435 
ii.  The  Canons  of  the  CCXVII.  Blessed  Fath- 
ers who  Assembled  at  Carthage,  Commonly 
Called  the  Code  of  Canons  of  the  African 

Church,  a.d.  419, 437 

Introductory  Note,         ....  438 
An  Ancient  Introduction,       .         .         .  440 
The  Canons  of  the  217  Blessed  Fathers 
who  Assembled  at  Carthage,        .         .  441 
iii.   Council  of  Constantinople  held  Under  Nec- 

tarius,  a.d.  394, 511 

Introductory   Note,         ....  512 
Council   of   Constantinople  under  Nec- 
tarius  of    Constantinople    and    The- 
ophilus  of  Alexandria,         .         .        .  513 
iv.  The    Council    of    Carthage    Held    Under 

Cyprian,  a.d.  257, 515 

Introductory  Note,  ....  516 
The  Synod  Held  at  Carthage  over  which 
Presided  the  Great  and  Holy  Martyr 
Cyprian,  Bishop  of  Carthage,  a.d.  257.  517 
Epistle  LXX.  Cyprian,  Liberalis,  Cale- 
donius,  etc.,  to  Their  Brethren,  Jan- 
uarius,  etc.,  Greeting,        .        .        .  518 

X.  The  Seventh  Ecumenical  Council — The 
Second  Council  op  Nice,  a.d.  787,    .        .  521 

Introduction, 523 

The  Divine  Sacra  Sent  by  the  Emperors 
Constantine  and  Irene  to  the  Most  Holy 
and  Blessed  Hadrian,  Pope  of  Old  Rome,  529 
The  Imperial  Sacra  Read  at  the  First  Ses- 
sion,          530 

Extracts  from  the  Acts — Session  I.,  .  .  533 
Extracts  from  the  Acts — Session  II.,  .  536 
Extracts  from  the  Acts — Session  III.,  .  539 
Extracts  from  the  Acts — Session  IV.,  .  539 
Extracts  from  the  Acts — Session  VI.,  .  542 
Epitome  of  the  Definition  of  the  Iconoclas- 
tic Conciliabulum,  Held  in  Constantino- 
ple, a.d.  754, 543 

Excursus  on  the  Conciliabulum  Styling 
Itself  the  Seventh  Ecumenical  Council, 
but  Commonly  Called  the  Mock  Synod 
of  Constantinople,  .....  546 
The  Decree  of  the  Holy,  Great,  Ecumeni- 
cal Synod,  the  Second  of  Nice,  .  .  549 
Excursus  on  the  Present  Teaching  of  the 
Latin  and  Greek  Churches  on  the  Sub- 
ject,          551 

The  Canons  of  the  Holy  and  Ecumenical 

Seventh  Council, 555 

Letter  of  the  Synod  to  the  Emperor  and 
Empress,         .        .        .        .        .        .  571 

Examination  of  the  Caroline  Books,        .  578 
Excursus  on  the  Council  of  Frankfort,  a.d. 

794, 583 

Historical  Note  on  the  So-called  "  Eighth 
General  Council "  and  Subsequent  Coun- 
cils,          586 


Appendix  Containing  Canons  and  Rulings, 
not  having  conciliak  origin,  but  ap- 
PROVED  by   Name  in  Canon   II.  op   the 

Synod  in  Trullo, 589 

Prefatory  Note 590 

1.  The  Apostolical  Canons,        ....  591 

The  Canons  of  the  Holy  and   Altogether 
August  Apostles 594 

2.  The  Canons  of  the  Blessed  Peter,  Archbishop 

of  Alexandria,  and  Martyr,  which  are 
Found  in  His  Sermon  on  Penitence,  .        .  601 

3.  The  Canonical  Epistle  of  St.  Gregory,  Arch- 

bishop of  Neocaesarea,  who  is  Called  Thau- 
maturgus,  Concerning  them  that  During 
the  Incursion  of  the  Barbarians  Ate  of 
Things  Offered  to  Idols,  and  Committed 
Certain  Other  Sins, 602 

4.  The  Epistle  of  St.  Athanasius  to  the  Monk 

Ammus, 602 

The  Epistle  of  the  Same  Athanasius 
Taken  from  the  XXXIX.  Festal  Epis- 
tle,         603 

The  Epistle  of  St.  Athanasius  to  Ruf- 
finian, 603 

5.  The  First  Canonical  Epistle  of  Our  Holy 

Father  Basil,  Archbishop  of  Caesarea  in 
Cappadocia,  to  Amphilochius,  Bishop  of 

Iconium, 604 

The   Second   Canonical  Epistle  of   the 

Same 605 

The  Third  Epistle  of  the  Same  to  the 
Same, 607 

6.  The  Canonical  Epistle  of  St.  Gregory,  Bish- 

op of  Nyssa,  to  St.  Letoi'us,  Bishop  of  Mity- 
lene, 611 

7.  From  the  Metre  Poems  of  St.  Gregory  The- 

ologus,  Specifying  which  Books  of  the  Old 
and  New  Testament  Should  be  Read,        .  612 

8.  From  the  Iambics  of  St.  Amphilochius,  the 

Bishop  to  Seleucus  on  the  Same  Sub- 
ject,      612 

9.  The   Canonical    Answers   of   Timothy,    the 

Most  Holy  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  who  was 
One  of  the  CL.  Fathers  Gathered  Together 
at  Constantinople,  to  the  Questions  Pro- 
posed to  Him  Concerning  Bishops  and 
Clerics, 612 

10.  The  Prosphonesus  of  Theophilus,  Archbishop 

of  Alexandria,  when  the  Holy  Epiphanies 
Happened  to  Fall  on  a  Sunday,  .         .        .613 
The  Commonitory  of  the   Same  which 
Amnion  Received  on  Account  of  Ly- 

cus, 614 

The  Narrative  of  the  Same  Concerning 
those  Called  Cathari,    .         .        .         .615 

11.  The  Canonical  Epistle  of  our  Holy  Father 

among  the  Saints,  Cyril,  Archbishop  of 
Alexandria,  on  the  Hymns. — Cyril  to  Dom- 
nus. — Of  the  Same  to  the  Bishops  of  Libya 
and  Pentapolis,   ....  .  615 

12.  The  Encyclical  Letter  of  Gennadius,  Patri- 

arch of  Constantinople,  and  of  the  Holy 
Synod  Met  with  Him  to  all  the  Holy  Metro- 
politans, and  to  the  Pope  of  the  City  of 
Rome, 615 


Index  of  Authors, 

Index  of  Names, 

Index  of  Words  and  Phrases, 

Index  of  Places, 

Index  of  Subjects,  . 


619 
622 
628 
630 
633 


PREFACE. 

The  work  intrusted  to  me  of  preparing  this  volume  evidently  can  be  divided  into 
two  separate  parts.  The  first,  the  collecting  of  the  material  needed  and  the  setting  of  it 
before  the  reader  in  the  English  tongue ;  the  other,  the  preparation  of  suitable  intro- 
ductions and  notes  to  the  matter  thus  provided.  Now  in  each  of  these  departments  two 
courses  were  open  to  the  editor  :  the  one,  to  be  original ;  the  other,  to  be  a  copyist.  I 
need  hardly  say  that  of  these  the  former  offered  many  temptations.  But  I  could  not 
fail  to  recognize  the  fact  that  such  a  course  would  greatly  take  from  the  real  value  of  the 
work,  and  therefore  without  any  hesitation  I  have  adopted  the  other  alternative,  and 
have  endeavoured,  so  far  as  was  at  all  possible,  to  keep  myself  out  of  the  question  alto- 
gether ;  and  as  a  general  rule  even  the  translation  of  the  text  (as  distinguished  from  the 
notes)  is  not  mine  but  that  of  some  scholar  of  well-established  reputation. 

In  the  carrying  out  of  this  method  of  procedure  I  have  availed  myself  of  all  the 
translations  which  I  could  find,  and  where,  after  comparing  them  with  the  original,  I 
have  thought  them  substantially  accurate,  I  have  adopted  them  and  reproduced  them. 
Where  I  have  thought  that  the  translation  was  misleading,  I  have  amended  it  from 
some  other  translation,  and,  I  think,  in  no  case  have  I  ventured  a  change  of  translation 
which  rests  upon  my  own  judgment  alone.  A  very  considerable  portion,  however,  of  the 
matter  found  in  this  volume  is  now  translated  into  English  for  the  first  time.  For  some 
of  this  I  am  indebted  to  my  friends,  who  have  most  kindly  given  me  every  assistance 
in  their  power,  but  even  here  no  translation  has  been  made  from  the  Greek  without  care- 
ful reference  being  had  to  the  traditional  understanding,  as  handed  down  in  the  Latin 
versions,  and  wherever  the  Latin  and  Greek  texts  differ  on  material  points  the  difference 
has  been  noted.  I  have  not  thought  it  necessary  nor  desirable  to  specify  the  source  of 
each  particular  translation,  but  I  have  provided  for  the  use  of  the  reader  a  list  of  all  the 
translations  which  I  have  used.  I  should  also  add  that  I  have  not  considered  any  one 
text  sufficiently  well  established  as  to  command  any  deference  being  paid  to  it,  and  that 
I  have  usually  followed  (for  my  own  convenience  rather  than  for  any  other  reason)  the 
text  contained  in  Labbe  and  Cossart's  Concilia.  No  doubt  Hardouin  and  Mansi  are  in 
some  respects  superior,  but  old  prejudices  are  very  strong,  and  the  reader  will  remem- 
ber that  these  differing  Concilia  gave  rise  to  a  hard-fought  battle  in  the  history  of  the 
Gallican  Church.  I  should  add,  however,  that  where  more  recent  students  of  the  sub- 
ject have  detected  errors  of  importance  in  Labbe's  text,  I  have  corrected  them,  usually 
noting  the  variety  of  reading.  With  regard  then  to  the  text  I  entirely  disclaim  any 
responsibility,  and  the  more  so  as  on  such  a  matter  my  opinion  would  be  entirely 
valueless.  And  with  regard  to  the  translation  my  responsibility  goes  no  further  than 
the  certifying  the  reader  that,  to  all  intents  and  purposes,  the  meaning  of  the  original  is 
presented  to  him  in  the  English  language  and  without  interpretation  being  introduced 
under  the  specious  guise  of  translation.     Some  portions  are  mere  literal  translations, 


viii  PREFACE 


and  some  are  done  into  more  idiomatic  English,  but  all — so  far  as  I  am  able  to  judge — 
are  fair  renderings  of  the  original,  its  ambiguities  being  duly  preserved.  I  have  used  as 
the  foundation  of  the  translation  of  the  canons  of  the  first  four  synods  and  of  the  five 
Provincial  Synods  that  most  convenient  book,  Index  Canonum,  by  the  Rev.  John  Ful- 
ton, D.D.,  D.C.L.,  in  which  united  to  a  good  translation  is  a  Greek  text,  very  well  edited 
and  clearly  printed. 

In  preparing  the  other  division  of  the  book,  that  is  to  say,  the  Introduction  and 
Notes,  I  have  been  guided  by  the  same  considerations.  Here  will  be  found  no  new  and 
brilliant  guesses  of  my  own,  but  a  collection  of  the  most  reliable  conclusions  of  the  most 
weighty  critics  and  commentators.  Where  the  notes  are  of  any  length  I  have  traced  the 
source  and  given  the  exact  reference,  but  for  the  brief  notes,  where  I  have  not  thought 
this  necessary,  the  reader  may  feel  the  greatest  confidence  that  he  is  not  reading  any 
surmises  of  mine,  but  that  in  every  particular  what  he  reads  rests  upon  the  authority  of 
the  greatest  names  who  have  written  on  the  subject.  In  the  bibliographical  table 
already  referred  to  I  have  placed  the  authorities  most  frequently  cited. 

I  think  it  necessary  to  make  a  few  remarks  upon  the  rule  which  I  have  laid  down 
for  myself  with  regard  to  my  attitude  on  controverted  questions  bearing  upon  doctrine 
or  ecclesiastical  discipline.  It  seems  to  me  that  in  such  a  work  as  the  present  any 
expression  of  the  editor's  views  would  be  eminently  out  of  place.  I  have  therefore  con- 
fined myself  to  a  bare  statement  of  what  I  conceive  to  be  the  facts  of  the  case,  and  have 
left  the  reader  to  draw  from  them  what  conclusions  he  pleases.  I  hope  that  this  vol- 
ume may  be  equally  acceptable  to  the  Catholic  and  to  the  Protestant,  to  the  Eastern  and 
to  the  Western,  and  while  I  naturally  think  that  the  facts  presented  are  clearly  in 
accordance  with  my  own  views,  I  hope  that  those  who  draw  from  the  same  premises 
different  conclusions  will  find  these  premises  stated  to  their  satisfaction  in  the  following- 
pages.  And  should  such  be  the  case  this  volume  may  well  be  a  step  toward  "  the  union 
of  all  "  and  toward  "  the  peace  of  all  the  holy  churches  of  God,"  for  which  the  unchang- 
ing East  has  so  constantly  prayed  in  her  liturgy. 

I  wish  to  explain  to  the  reader  one  other  principle  on  which  I  have  proceeded  in 
preparing  this  volume.  It  professes  to  be  a  translation  of  the  decrees  and  canons  of 
certain  ecclesiastical  synods.  It  is  not  a  history  of  those  synods,  nor  is  it  a  theological 
treatise  upon  the  truth  or  otherwise  of  the  doctrines  set  forth  by  those  synods  in  their 
legislation.  I  have  therefore  carefully  restricted  my  own  historical  introductions  to  a 
bare  statement  of  such  facts  as  seemed  needed  to  render  the  meaning  of  the  matter  sub- 
sequently presented  intelligible  to  the  reader.  And  with  regard  to  doctrine  I  have 
pursued  the  same  course,  merely  explaining  what  the  doctrine  ta  tght  or  condemned 
was,  without  entering  into  any  consideration  of  its  truth  or  falsity.  For  the  history  of 
the  Church  and  its  Councils  the  reader  must  consult  the  great  historians ;  for  a  defence 
of  the  Church's  faith  he  must  read  the  works  of  her  theologians. 

I  need  hardly  say  that  the  overwhelming  majority  of  the  references  found  in  this 
volume  I  have  had  no  opportunity  of  verifying,  no  copy  of  many  of  the  books  being  (so 
far  as  I  know)  to  be  found  in  America.  I  have,  however,  taken  great  pains  to  insure 
accuracy  in  reproducing  the  references  as  given  in  the  books  from  which  I  have  cited 
them  ;  this,  however,  does  not  give  me  any  feeling  of  confidence  that  they  may  be  relied 
on,  especially  as  in  some  cases  where  I  have  been  able  to  look  them  up,  I  have  found 
errors  of  the  most  serious  kind. 


PREFACE  ix 


It  now  only  remains  that  I  thank  all  those  who  have  assisted  me  in  this  work,  and 
especially  I  must  mention  his  Excellency  the  High  Procurator  of  the  Holy  Governing 
Synod  of  Russia,  who  directed  the  bibliographical  table  of  Russian  editions  of  the  Canons, 
etc.,  which  is  found  in  this  volume,  to  be  prepared  for  me  by  Professor  Glubokoffski 
of  the  Ecclesiastical  Academy  at  St.  Petersburgh.  My  special  thanks  are  due  to  the 
learned  professor  just  named  for  the  very  admirable  manner  in  which  he  has  performed 
the  work,  and  to  Mr.  W.  J.  Birkbeck,  who  has  added  one  more  to  his  numerous  labours 
for  making  the  "West  better  acquainted  with  the  East  by  translating  the  Russian  MS. 
into  English.  I  cannot  but  pause  here  to  remark  how  deep  my  regret  is  that  my  igno- 
rance of  the  Russian  and  Slavic  tongues  has  prevented  me  from  laying  before  my  readers 
the  treasures  of  learning  and  the  stores  of  tradition  and  local  illustration  which  these 
volumes  must  contain.  I  am,  however,  extremely  well  pleased  in  being  able  to  put 
those,  who  are  more  fortunate  than  myself  in  this  respect,  in  the  way  of  investigating 
the  matter  for  themselves,  by  supplying  them  with  the  titles  of  the  books  on  the  subject. 
I  desire  also  to  offer  my  thanks  to  Professor  Bolotoff  for  the  valuable  information  he 
sent  me  as  well  as  for  a  copy  of  his  learned  (and  often  most  just)  strictures  upon  Pro- 
fessor Lauchert's  book,  "  Die  Kanones  der  wichtigsten  altkirchlichen  Concilien  nebst 
den  Apostolischen  Kanones."     (Freiburg  in  B.  und  Leipzig,  1896.) 

The  Rev.  Wm.  McGarvey  has  helped  me  most  kindly  by  translating  parts  of  the 
Second  Council  of  Nice,  and  one  or  more  of  the  African  Canons ;  and  by  looking 
over  the  translation  of  the  entire  African  Code. 

The  Rev.  F.  A.  Sanborn  translated  two  of  St.  Cyril's  letters,  and  the  Rev.  Leighton 
Hoskins  the  Sardican  Canons.  To  these  and  many  other  of  my  friends,  who  in  one  way 
or  another  helped  me,  I  wish  to  return  my  deep  thanks  ;  also  to  the  Nashotah  Theo- 
logical Seminary  and  to  the  Lutheran  Theological  Seminary  at  Mt.  Airy,  Philadel- 
phia, for  having  placed  their  libraries  entirely  at  my  disposal ;  nor  can  I  end  this  list 
without  mention  of  my  sister,  who  has  assisted  me  most  materially  through  the  entire 
progress  of  the  work,  and  without  whom  I  never  could  have  undertaken  it. 

When  I  think  of  the  great  number  of  authors  cited,  of  the  rapidity  with  which  most 
of  the  translation  has  had  to  be  done,  of  the  difficulty  of  getting  access  to  the  necessary 
books,  and  of  the  vast  range  of  subjects  touched  upon  (including  almost  every  branch 
of  ecclesiastical  and  theological  learning),  I  feel  I  must  throw  myself  and  my  work  upon 
the  reader's  indulgence  and  beg  him  to  take  all  this  in  consideration  in  making  his  esti- 
mate of  the  value  of  the  work  done.  As  for  me,  now  that  it  is  all  finished,  I  feel  like 
crying  out  with  the  reader,  in  deep  shame  at  the  recollection  of  the  many  blunders  he 
has  made  in  reading  the  lesson, "  Tu  autem,  Domine,  miserere  nobis ! " 

In  conclusion  I  would  add  that  nothing  I  have  written  must  be  interpreted  as  mean- 
ing that  the  editor  personally  has  any  doubt  of  the  truth  of  the  doctrines  set  forth  by 
the  Ecumenical  Councils  of  the  Christian  Church,  and  I  wish  to  declare  in  the  most 
distinct  manner  that  I  accept  all  the  doctrinal  decrees  of  the  Seven  Ecumenical  Synods 
as  infallible  and  irreformable. 

Henry  R.  Percival. 

Pentecost,  1899. 


GENERAL   INTRODUCTION. 


I.    METHOD   OF  TREATMENT. 


It  is  absolutely  necessary  that  a  few  words  should  be  said  on  the  general  arrange- 
ment of  the  work.  The  reader  will  find  given  him  in  the  English  tongue,  so  far 
as  they  have  come  down  to  us,  all  the  doctrinal  definitions  of  the  Seven  Ecumenical 
Councils  (councils  which  have  always,  and  still  do,  receive  the  unqualified  acceptance  of 
both  East  and  West),  and  all  the  canons,  disciplinary  and  doctrinal,  which  were  enacted 
by  them.  To  these  has  been  added  a  translation  in  full  of  all  the  canons  of  the  local 
synods  which  received  the  approval  and  sanction  of  the  aforesaid  Ecumenical  Councils. 
Besides  this,  as  throwing  light  upon  the  subject,  large  extracts  from  the  Acta  have  been 
given,  in  fact  all  that  seemed  to  illustrate  the  decrees  ;  and,  that  nothing  might  be  lack- 
ing, in  an  appendix  has  been  placed  a  collection  of  all  the  non-synodal  canons  which 
have  received  the  sanction  of  the  Ecumenical  Synods,  the  "  Canons  of  the  Apostles  " 
(so  called)  being  given  in  full,  and  the  others  in  a  shortened  form,  for  the  most  part  in 
the  words  of  the  admirable  and  learned  John  Johnson. 

This  then  is  the  text  of  the  volume ;  but  it  is  manifest  that  it  stood  in  need  of  much 
comment  to  make  its  meaning  clear  to  the  reader,  even  if  well  informed  on  ordinary 
matters.  To  provide  for  this,  to  each  synodal  canon  there  has  been  added  the  Ancient 
Epitome. 

Of  this  Epitome  Bishop  Beveridge  treats  with  great  learning  in  section  xxvi.  of  his 
"Prolegomena  "  to  his  Synodicon,  and  shows  that  while  some  attributed  this  epitome  to 
the  Greek  mediaeval  scholiast  Aristenus,  it  cannot  be  his,  as  he  has  taken  it  for  the  text 
of  his  commentaries,  and  has  in  more  than  one  instance  pointed  out  that  whoever  he 
was  who  made  it  had,  in  his  judgment,  missed  the  sense.1 

The  Epitome  must  indeed  be  much  older,  for  Nicholas  Hydruntinus,  who  lived  in 
the  times  of  Alexis  Angelus,  when  intending  to  quote  one  of  the  canons  of  Ephesus, 
actually  quotes  words  which  are  not  in  that  canon,  but  which  are  in  the  Epitome. 
"  Wherefore,"  says  Beveridge,  "  it  is  manifest  that  the  Epitome  is  here  cited,  and  that 
under  the  name  of  the  whole  canon."  This  being  established  we  may  justly  look  upon 
the  Ancient  Epitome  as  supplying  us  with  a  very  ancient  gloss  upon  the  canons. 

To  this  Epitome  have  been  added  Notes,  taken  from  most  of  the  great  commentators, 
and  Excursuses,  largely  made  up  from  the  writings  of  the  greatest  theologians,  canonists, 
archaeologists,  etc.,  with  regard  to  whom  and  their  writings,  all  the  information  that 
seems  necessary  the  reader  will  find  in  the  Bibliographical  Introduction. 


II.  CONCEBNING  ECUMENICAL  COUNCILS  IN  GENERAL. 

An  Ecumenical  Synod  may  be  defined  as  a  synod  the  decrees  of  which  have  found 
acceptance  by  the  Church  in  the  whole  world.2  It  is  not  necessary  to  make  a  council 
ecumenical  that  the  number  of  bishops  present  should  be  large,  there  were  but  325  at 
Nice,  and  150  at  I.  Constantinople  ;  it  is  not  necessary  that  it  should  be  assembled  with 
the  intention  of  its  being  ecumenical,  such  was  not  the  case  with  I.  Constantinople  ;  it  is 

1  Vide  Apostolic  Canon  LXXV.,  and  Ancyr.  Canon  XIX. 

2  This  was  until  the  division  of  the  East  and  West  the  definition  accepted  by  all  the  whole  Christian  world.  But  since  the  Church 
has  been  divided,  while  the  East  has  kept  to  the  old  definition  and  has  not  pretended  to  have  held  any  Ecumenical  Councils,  the  Ro- 
man Church  has  made  a  new  definition  of  the  old  term  and  has  then  proceeded  to  hold  a  very  considerable  number  of  synods  which 
she  recognizes  as  Ecumenical.  I  say  "  a  very  considerable  number,"  for  even  among  Roman  Catholic  theologians  there  is  much 
dispute  as  to  the  number  of  these  "  Ecumenical  Synods,"  the  decrees  of  which,  like  those  of  Trent  and  the  Vatican,  have  never  been 
received  by  about  half  of  the  Christian  world,  including  four  of  the?five  patriarchates,  and  of  the  fifth  patriarchate  all  the  Anglican 
communion.  According  to  modern  Roman  writers  the  definition  of  these  non-ecumenically  received  Ecumenical  Synods  is  "  Ecu- 
menical councils  are  those  to  which  the  bishops  and  others  entitled  to  vote  are  convoked  from  the  whole  world  under  the  Presidency 
of  the  Pope  or  his  legates,  and  the  decrees  of  which,  having  received  Papal  confirmation,  bind  all  Christians."  Addis  and  Arnold, 
A  Catholic  Dictionary,  s.  v.  Councils.  The  reader  will  notice  that  by  this  definition  one  at  least  (I.  Constantinople),  probably  three, 
of  the  seven  undisputed  Ecumenical  Synods  cease  to  be  such. 


xii  GENERAL  INTRODUCTION 

not  necessary  that  all  parts  of  the  world  should  have  been  represented  or  even  that  the 
bishops  of  such  parts  should  have  been  invited.  All  that  is  necessary  is  that  its  de- 
crees find  ecumenical  acceptance  afterwards,  and  its  ecumenical  character  be  univer- 
sally recognized. 

The  reader  will  notice  that  in  the  foregoing  I  have  not  proceeded  from  the  theologi- 
cal foundation  of  what  an  Ecumenical  Synod  should  be  (with  this  question  the  present 
volume  has  nothing  to  do),  but  from  a  consideration  of  the  historical  question  as  to 
what  the  Seven  Councils  have  in  common,  which  distinguishes  them  from  the  other 
councils  of  the  Christian  Church. 

And  here  it  is  well  to  note  that  there  have  been  many  "  General  Councils  "  which 
have  not  been  "  Ecumenical."  It  is  true  that  in  ordinary  parlance  we  often  use  the 
expressions  as  interchangeable,  but  such  really  is  not  the  case.  There  are  but  seven 
universally  recognized  and  undisputed  "  Ecumenical  Councils  "  ;  on  the  other  hand,  the 
number  of  "  General  Councils  "  is  very  considerable,  and  as  a  matter  of  fact  of  these  last 
several  very  large  ones  fell  into  heresy.  It  is  only  necessary  to  mention  as  examples 
the  Latrocinium  and  the  spurious  "  Seventh  Council,"  held  by  the  iconoclastic  heretics. 
It  is  therefore  the  mere  statement  of  an  historical  fact  to  say  that  General  Councils 
have  erred. 

The  Ecumenical  Councils  claimed  for  themselves  an  immunity  from  error  in  their  doc- 
trinal and  moral  teaching,  resting  such  claim  upon  the  promise  of  the  presence  and  guid- 
ance of  the  Holy  Ghost.  The  Council  looked  upon  itself,  not  as  revealing  any  new 
truth,  but  as  setting  forth  the  faith  once  for  all  delivered  to  the  Saints,  its  decisions 
therefore  were  in  themselves  ecumenical,  as  being  an  expression  of  the  mind  of  the 
whole  body  of  the  faithful  both  clerical  and  lay,  the  sensus  communis  of  the  Church. 
And  by  the  then  teaching  of  the  Church  that  ecumenical  consensus  was  considered  free 
from  the  suspicion  of  error,  guarded,  (as  was  believed,)  by  the  Lord's  promise  that  the 
gates  of  hell  should  not  prevail  against  his  Church.  This  then  is  what  Catholics  mean 
when  they  affirm  the  infallibility  of  Ecumenical  Councils.  Whether  this  opinion  is  true 
or  false  is  a  question  outside  the  scope  of  the  present  discussion.  It  was  necessary, 
however,  to  state  that  these  Councils  looked  upon  themselves  as  divinely  protected  in 
their  decisions  from  error  in  faith  and  morals,  lest  the  reader  should  otherwise  be  at  a 
loss  to  understand  the  anathematisms  which  follow  the  decrees,  and  which  indeed  would 
be  singularly  out  of  place,  if  the  decrees  which  they  thus  emphatically  affirm  were  sup- 
posed to  rest  only  upon  human  wisdom  and  speculation,  instead  of  upon  divine  authority. 

Theologians  consider  that  the  decisions  of  Ecumenical  Councils,  like  all  juridical 
decrees,  must  be  construed  strictly,  and  that  only  the  point  at  issue  must  be  looked  upon 
as  decided.  The  obiter  dicta  of  so  august  a  body  are  no  doubt  of  the  greatest  weight, 
but  yet  they  have  no  claim  to  be  possessed  of  that  supreme  authority  which  belongs  to 
the  definition  of  the  particular  point  under  consideration.1 

The  Seven  Ecumenical  Councils  were  all  called  together  at  the  commandment  and 
will  of  Princes  ;  without  any  knowledge  of  the  matter  on  the  part  of  the  Pope  in  one 
case  at  least  (1st  Constantinople)  2 ;  without  any  consultation  with  him  in  the  case  of 
I.  Nice,  so  far  as  we  know 3 ;  and  contrary  to  his  expressed  desire  in  at  least  the  case  of 
Chalcedon,  when  he  only  gave  a  reluctant  consent  after  the  Emperor  Marcian  had 
already  convoked  the  synod.  From  this  it  is  historically  evident  that  Ecumenical 
Councils  can  be  summoned  without  either  the  knowledge  or  consent  of  the  See  of 
Rome. 

In  the  history  of  the  Christian  Church,  especially  at  a  later  period  in  connection 
with  the  Great  Schism,  much  discussion  has  taken  place  among  the  learned  as  to  the 
relative  powers  of  a  General  Council  and  of  the  Pope.  It  will  be  remembered  by  every- 
one that  the  superior  authority  of  the  council  was  not  only  taught,  but  on  one  occasion 

1  Vide  Vasquez,  P.  m.,  Disp.  181,  c.  9 ;  Bellarmin.,  De  Concil.,  Lib.  II.,  cap.  svij. ;  Veron,  Rule  of  the  Cath.  Faith,  Chap.  I.,  §§ 
4,  5,  and  6. 

2  See  Hefele's  answer  to  Baronius's  special  pleading.    Hist.  Councils,  Vol.  I.,  pp.  9, 10. 

3  It  should  be  stated  that  at  the  Sixth  Synod  it  was  said  that  I,  Nice  was  "summoned  by  the  Emperor  and  Pope  Sylvester,"  on 
what  authority  I  know  not, 


GENERAL   INTRODUCTION  xiii 

acted  on,  by  a  council,  but  this  is  outside  of  the  period  covered  by  the  Seven  Ecumen- 
ical Synods,  and  I  shall  therefore  only  discuss  the  relations  of  these  seven  synods  to 
the  Roman  See.  And  in  the  first  place  it  is  evident  that  no  council  has  ever  been  re- 
ceived as  ecumenical  which  has  not  been  received  and  confirmed  by  the  Roman  Pontiff. 
But,  after  all,  this  is  only  saying  that  no  council  has  been  accepted  as  ecumenical  which 
has  not  been  ecumenically  received,  for  it  must  be  remembered  that  there  was  but  one 
Patriarchate  for  the  whole  West,  that  of  Rome ;  and  this  is  true  to  all  intents  and  pur- 
poses, whether  or  no  certain  sections  had  extrapatriarchal  privileges,  and  were  "  auto- 
cephalous." 

But  it  would  be  giving  an  entirely  unfair  impression  of  the  matter  to  the  reader 
were  he  left  to  suppose  that  this  necessity  for  Rome's  confirmation  sprang  necessarily 
from  any  idea  of  Rome's  infallibility.  So  far  as  appears  from  any  extant  document, 
such  an  idea  was  as  unknown  in  the  whole  world  then  as  it  is  in  four  of  the  five  patri- 
archates to-day.  And  it  should  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  confirmation  by  the  Emperor 
was  sought  for  and  spoken  of  in  quite  as  strong,  if  not  stronger,  terms.  Before  passing 
to  a  particular  examination  of  what  relation  each  of  the  Councils  bore  to  the  Roman 
See,  it  may  be  well  to  note  that  while  as  an  historical  fact  each  of  the  Seven  Ecumen- 
ical Councils  did  eventually  find  acceptance  at  Rome,  this  fact  does  not  prove  that  such 
acceptance  is  necessary  in  the  nature  of  things.  If  we  can  imagine  a  time  when  Rome 
is  not  in  communion  with  the  greater  part  of  the  West,  then  it  is  quite  possible  to  im- 
agine that  an  Ecumenical  Council  could  be  held  whose  decrees  would  (for  the  time 
being)  be  rejected  by  the  unworthy  occupant  of  the  Apostolic  See.  I  am  not  asserting 
that  such  a  state  of  affairs  is  possible  from  a  theological  standpoint,  but  merely  stating 
an  historical  contingency  which  is  perfectly  within  the  range  of  imagination,  even  if  cut 
off  from  any  practical  possibility  by  the  faith  of  some. 

We  now  come  to  a  consideration  of  how,  by  its  acts,  each  of  the  Seven  Synods  in- 
timated its  relation  to  the  Roman  See  : 

1.  The  First  Council  of  Nice  passed  a  canon  in  which  some  at  least  of  the  Roman 
rights  are  evidently  looked  upon  as  being  exactly  on  the  same  plane  as  those  of  other 
metropolitans,  declaring  that  they  rest  upon  "  custom." 

It  was  the  Emperor  who  originated  this  council  and  called  it  together,  if  we  may 
believe  his  own  words  and  those  of  the  council ;  and  while  indeed  it  is  possible  that 
when  the  Emperor  did  not  preside  in  person,  Hosius  of  Cordova  may  have  done  so 
(even  uniting  the  two  Roman  Presbyters  who  were  the  legates  of  the  Roman  See  with 
him),  yet  there  is  no  evidence  that  anything  of  the  kind  ever  took  place,  and  a  pope, 
Felix  III.  (a.d.  483-492),  in  his  Fifth  Epistle  (ad  Imp.  Zen.)  declares  that  Eustathius, 
bishop  of  Antioch,  presided  at  this  council.1 

The  matter,  however,  is  of  little  moment  as  no  one  would  deny  the  right  of  the  See 
of  Rome  to  preside  in  a  council  of  the  whole  Church. 

2.  The  Second  Ecumenical  Council  was  called  together  by  the  Emperor  without  the 
knowledge  of  the  Roman  Pontiff.  Nor  was  he  invited  to  be  present.  Its  first  presi- 
dent was  not  in  communion  at  the  time  of  its  session  with  the  Roman  Church.  And, 
without  any  recourse  to  the  first  of  all  the  patriarchs,  it  passed  a  canon  changing  the 
order  of  the  patriarchates,  and  setting  the  new  see  of  Constantinople  in  a  higher  place 
than  the  other  ancient  patriarchates,  in  fact  immediately  after  Rome.  Of  course  Prot- 
estants will  consider  this  a  matter  of  very  minor  importance,  looking  upon  all  patri- 
archal divisions  and  rank  and  priority  (the  Papacy  included)  as  of  a  disciplinary  char- 
acter and  as  being  jure  ecclesiastico,  and  in  no  way  affecting  doctrine,  but  any  fair 
reading  of  the  third  canon  of  this  synod  would  seem  plainly  to  assert  that  as  the  first 
rank  of  Rome  rested  upon  the  fact  of  its  being  the  capital  city,  so  the  new  capital  city 
should  have  the  second  rank.  If  this  interpretation  is  correct  it  affects  very  materially 
the  Roman  claim  oijure  divino  primacy. 

3.  Before  the  third  of  the  Ecumenical  Synods  was  called  to  meet,  Pope  Celestine 
had  already  convicted  Nestorius  of  heresy  and  deposed  and  excommunicated  him.    When 

'  Cf.  Theod.  B.  K,  Lib.  I.,  e.  6. 


xiv  GENERAL  INTRODUCTION 

subsequently  the  synod  was  assembled,  and  before  the  papal  legates  had  arrived,  the 
Council  met,  treated  Nestorius  as  in  good  standing,  entirely  ignoring  the  sentence 
already  given  by  Rome,  and  having  examined  the  case  (after  summoning  him  three 
times  to  appear  that  he  might  be  heard  in  his  own  defence),  proceeded  to  sentence 
Nestorius,  and  immediately  published  the  sentence.  On  the  10th  of  July  (more  than 
a  fortnight  later),  the  papal  legates  having  arrived,  a  second  session  was  held,  at 
which  they  were  told  what  had  been  done,  all  of  which  they  were  good  enough  to 
approve  of.1 

4.  The  Council  of  Chalcedon  refused  to  consider  the  Eutychian  matter  as  settled  by 
Rome's  decision  or  to  accept  Leo's  Tome  without  examination  as  to  whether  it  was  ortho- 
dox. Moreover  it  passed  a  canon  at  a  session  which  the  Papal  legates  refused  to  attend, 
ratifying  the  order  of  the  Patriarchates  fixed  at  I.  Constantinople,  and  declaring  that 
"  the  Fathers  had  very  properly  given  privileges  to  Old  Rome  as  the  imperial  city,  and 
that  now  they  gave  the  same  (ra  laa  Trpecrfieia)  privileges  "  to  Constantinople  as  the 
seat  of  the  imperial  government  at  that  time. 

5.  The  fifth  of  the  Ecumenical  Synods  refused  to  receive  any  written  doctrinal  com- 
munication from  the  then  pope  (Vigilius),  took  his  name  from  the  diptychs,  and  re- 
fused him  communion. 

6.  The  Third  Council  of  Constantinople,  the  sixth  of  the  Ecumenical  Synods,  ex- 
communicated Pope  Honorius,  who  had  been  dead  for  years,  for  holding  and  teaching 
the  Monothelite  heresy. 

7.  It  is  certain  that  the  Pope  had  nothing  to  do  with  the  calling  of  the  Seventh 
Synod,2  and  quite  possible  that  it  was  presided  over  by  Tarasius  and  not  by  the  Papal 
legates. 

Such  is,  in  brief,  the  evidence  which  the  Ecumenical  Councils  give  on  the  subject  of 
what,  for  lack  of  a  better  designation,  may  be  called  the  Papal  claims.  Under  these  cir- 
cumstances it  may  not  be  deemed  strange  that  some  extreme  ultramontanists  have  ar- 
rived at  the  conclusion  that  much  of  the  acts  and  decisions  as  Ave  have  them  is  spurious, 
or  at  least  corrupted  in  an  anti-papal  direction.  Vincenzi,  who  is  the  most  learned  of 
these  writers,  argues  somewhat  thus  '  if  the  members  of  the  Ecumenical  Synods  believed 
as  we  do  to-day  with  regard  to  the  Papacy  it  is  impossible  that  they  should  have  acted 
and  spoken  as  they  did,  but  we  know  they  must  have  believed  as  we  do,  ergo  they  did 
not  so  act  or  speak.'  The  logic  is  admirable,  but  the  truth  of  the  conclusion  depends 
upon  the  truth  of  the  minor  premise.  The  forgeries  would  have  been  very  extensive, 
and  who  were  they  done  by  ?  Forgeries,  as  the  false  decretals,  to  advance  papal  claims 
we  are  unfortunately  familiar  with,  but  it  is  hard  to  imagine  who  could  have  forged  in 
Greek  and  Latin  the  acts  of  the  Ecumenical  Synods.  It  is  not  necessary  to  pursue  the 
matter  any  further,  perhaps  its  very  mention  was  uncalled  for,  but  I  wish  to  be  abso- 
lutely fair,  that  no  one  may  say  that  any  evidence  has  been  suppressed.3 

1  Protestant  Controversialists,  as  well  as  others,  have  curious  ways  of  stating  historical  events  without  any  regard  to  the  facts  of 
the  case.  A  notable  instance  of  this  is  found  in  Dr.  Salmon's  Infallibility  of  the  Church  (p.  426  of  the  2d  Edition)  where  we  are 
told  that  "  the  only  one  of  the  great  controversies  in  which  the  Pope  really  did  his  part  in  teaching  Christians  what  to  believe  was 
the  Eutychian  controversy.  Leo  the  Great,  instead  of  waiting,  as  Popes  usually  do,  till  the  question  was  settled,  published  his  sen- 
timents at  the  beginning,  and  bis  letter  to  Flavian  was  adopted  by  the  Council  of  Chalcedon.  This  is  what  would  have  always  hap- 
pened if  God  had  really  made  the  Pope  the  guide  to  the  Church.  But  this  case  is  quite  exceptional,  resulting  from  the  accident  that 
Leo  was  a  good  theologian,  besides  being  a  man  of  great  vigour  of  character.  No  similar  influence  was  exercised  either  by  his  pred- 
ecessors or  successors."  This  sentence  is  not  pleasant  reading,  for  it  is  an  awe-inspiring  display  of  one  of  two  things,  neither  of 
which  should  be  in  the  author  of  such  a  book.  We  need  only  remind  the  reader  that  Celestine  had  condemned  Nestorius  and  his 
teaching  before  the  Council  of  Ephesus  ;  that  Honorius  had  written  letters  defining  the  question  with  regard  to  the  will  or  wills  of 
the  Incarnate  Son  before  the  HI.  Council  of  Constantinople  (which  excommunicated  him  as  s.  heretic  for  these  very  letters) ;  that  Pone 
Vigilius  condemned  the  "  Three  Chapters  "  before  the  H.  Council  of  Constantinople  ;  and  that  Gregory  II.  condemned  the  iconoclastic 
heresy  before  the  Seventh  Synod,  if  the  letters  attributed  to  him  be  genuine  (which  is  not  quite  certain,  as  will  be  shewn  in  its 
proper  place).  Thus  the  only  two  great  questions  not  decided,  one  way  or  another,  by  the  See  of  Rome  before  the  meeting  of  a 
General  Council  were  Arianism  and  Macedonianism,  and  some  have  held  (though  mistakenly  as  is  generally  thought)  that  Arius 
was  condemned  by  a  synod  held  at  Rome  before  that  of  Nice. 

2  See  Michaud's  brilliant  answer  to  Hefele,  Discussion  sur  les  Sept  Conciles  (Ecuminiques,  p.  327. 

3  The  reader  may  easily  satisfy  himself  on  this  matter  by  reading  the  somewhat  extensive  works  of  Aloysius  Vincenzi,  published 
in  Rome  in  1875  and  thereabouts. 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  xv 


III.   THE  NUMBEB  OF   THE  ECUMENICAL   SYNODS. 

It  may  not  be  unjustly  expected  that  some  reasons  should  be  assigned  for  limiting 
the  number  of  the  Ecumenical  Synods  to  seven.  There  is  no  need  here  to  enter  into 
any  proof  that  Nice,  I.  Constantinople,  Ephesus  and  Chalcedon  are  Ecumenical,  since 
so  long  ago  as  the  time  of  St.  Gregory  the  Great,  that  Saint  and  Doctor  said  of  them : 
"  I  venerate  the  first  four  Ecumenical  Councils  equally  with  the  Four  Gospels  (sicut 
quatuor  Evangelia),"  *  and  no  one  has  been  found  to  question  that  in  so  saying  he  gave 
expression  to  the  mind  of  the  Church  of  his  day.  Of  the  fifth  and  sixth  synods  there 
never  was  any  real  doubt,  although  there  was  trouble  at  first  about  the  reception  of  the 
fifth  in  some  places.  The  ecumenical  character  of  the  seventh  is  not  disputed  by  East 
or  West  and  has  not  been  for  near  a  thousand  years,  and  full  proof  of  its  ecumenicity 
will  be  found  in  connection  with  that  council.  There  is  therefore  no  possible  doubt 
that  these  seven  must  be  included,  but  it  may  be  asked  why  certain  others  are  not  here 
also. 

The  following  is  a  list  of  those  that  might  seem  to  have  a  claim :  Sardica  (343 
circa),  Quinisext  (692),  Constantinople  (869),  Lyons  (1274),  and  Florence  (1439). 

The  reasons  for  rejecting  the  claims  of  Sardica  will  be  found  in  connection  with  the 
canons  set  forth  by  that  council.  The  same  is  the  case  with  regard  to  the  claims  of  the 
Synod  in  Trullo.  It  is  true  that  IV.  Constantinople,  holden  in  A.D.  869,  was  for  a  short 
while  held  as  Ecumenical  by  both  East  and  West,  and  continues  to  be  held  as  such  by 
the  Latin  Church  down  to  this  day,  but  it  was  soon  rejected  by  the  East  and  another 
synod  of  Constantinople  (879),  which  undid  much  of  its  work,  has  for  the  Greeks  taken 
its  place.  However  the  Easterns  do  not  claim  for  this  synod  an  ecumenical  character, 
but  confine  the  number  to  seven. 

The  Councils  of  Lyons  and  Florence  both  fail  of  ecumenicity  for  the  same  reason. 
At  both  the  East  was  represented,  and  at  each  an  agreement  was  arrived  at,  but  neither 
agreement  was  subsequently  accepted  in  the  East,  and  the  decrees  therefore  have  failed, 
as  yet,  of  receiving  eciimenical  acceptance. 

We  are  left  therefore  with  Seven  Ecumenical  Councils,  neither  more  nor  less,  and 
these  are  fully  treated  of  in  the  pages  that  follow. 

>  Epistle  XXIV.  of  Lib.  I. 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL   INTRODUCTION. 

To  the  student  of  the  ancient  synods  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  the  name  of  William 
Beveridge  must  ever  stand  most  illustrious ;  and  his  work  on  the  canons  of  the  undi- 
vided Church  as  received  by  the  Greeks,  piiblished  at  Oxford  in  1672,  will  remain  a 
lasting  glory  to  the  Anglican  Church,  as  the  "  Concilia  "  of  Labbe  and  Cossart,  which 
appeared  in  Paris  about  the  same  time,  must  ever  redound  to  the  glory  of  her  sister,  the 
Gallican  Church. 

Of  the  permanent  value  of  Beveridge's  work  there  can  be  no  greater  evidence  than 
that  to-day  it  is  quoted  all  the  world  over,  and  not  only  are  Anglicans  proud  of  the 
bishop  of  St.  Asaph,  but  Catholics  and  Protestants,  Westerns  and  Easterns  alike  quote 
him  as  an  authority.  In  illustration  of  this  it  will  be  sufficient  to  mention  two  ex- 
amples, the  most  extensive  and  learned  work  on  the  councils  of  our  own  day,  that  by 
the  Roman  Catholic  bishop  Hefele,  and  the  "  Compendium  of  Canon  Law,"  by  the 
Metropolitan  of  the  Orthodox  Greek  Hungarian  Church,1  in  both  of  which  the  reader 
will  find  constant  reference  to  Beveridge's  "  Synodicon." 

This  great  work  appeared  in  two  volumes  full  folio,  with  the  Greek  text,  beauti- 
fully printed,  but  of  course  with  the  ligatures  so  perplexing  to  the  ordinary  Greek 
reader  of  to-day.  It  should  however  be  noted  that  the  most  learned  and  interesting 
Prolegomena  in  HvvoSikov  sive  Pandectce  Canonum,  as  well  as  the  Praefationem  ad 
annotationes  in  Canones  Apostolicos,  is  reprinted  as  an  Appendix  to  Vol.  XII.  of  "  The 
Theological  Works  of  William  Beveridge,  sometime  lord  bishop  of  St.  Asaph,"  in  the 
"  Library  of  Anglo-Catholic  Theology,"  (published  at  Oxford,  1848),  which  also  contains 
a  reprint  of  the  "  Codex  Canonum  Ecclesiae  Primitive  vindicatus  ac  illustratus,"  of 
which  last  work  I  shall  have  something  to  say  in  connection  with  the  Apostolical  Can- 
ons in  the  Appendix  to  this  volume. 

Nothing  could  exceed  the  value  of  the  Prolegomena  and  it  is  greatly  to  be  wished 
that  this  most  unique  preface  were  more  read  by  students.  It  contains  a  fund  of  out- 
of-the-way  information  which  can  be  found  nowhere  else  collected  together,  and  while 
indeed  later  research  has  thrown  some  further  light  upon  the  subject,  yet  the  main 
conclusions  of  Bishop  Beveridge  are  still  accepted  by  the  learned  with  but  few  ex- 
ceptions. I  have  endeavoured,  as  far  as  possible  to  incorporate  into  this  volume  the 
most  important  part  of  the  learned  bishop's  notes  and  observations,  but  the  real  stu- 
dent must  consult  the  work  itself.  The  reader  will  be  interested  to  know  that  the 
greatest  English  scholars  of  his  day  assisted  Bishop  Beveridge  in  his  work,  among 
whom  was  John  Pearson,  the  defender  of  the  Ignatian  Epistles. 

I  think  I  cannot  do  better  than  set  out  in  full  the  contents  of  the  Synodicon  so  that 
the  student  may  know  just  what  he  will  find  in  its  pages  : 

"  TZvvohbicov  sive  Padectae  Canonum  SS.  Apostolorum,  et  Conciliorum  ab  Ecclesia 
Graeca  receptorum ;  necnon  Canonicorum  SS.  Patrum  Epistolarum  :  Una  cum  Scholiis 
Antiquorum  singulis  eorum  annexis,  et  scriptis  aliis  hue  spectantibus  ;  quorum  plurima 
e  Biblothecse  Bodleianse  aliarumque  MSS.  codicibus  nunc  primum  edita  :  reliqua  cum 
iisdem  MSS.  summa  fide  et  diligentia  collata.  Totum  Opus  in  duos  Tomos  divisum, 
Guilielmus  Beverigius,  Ecclesiae  Anglicanae  Presbyter,  Recensuit,  Prolegomenis  muni- 
vit,  et  Annotationibus  auxit.     Oxonii,  E  Theatro  Sheldoniano.     M.DC.LXXII." 

Such  is  the  title  in  full.  I  proceed  to  note  the  contents,  premising  that  for  all  the 
Greek  a  Latin  translation  is  given  in  a  parallel  column  : 

Volume  I. 

The  Canons  of  the  Holy  Apostles,  with  the  Ancient  Epitome,  and  the  scholia  of  Bal- 
samon,  Zonaras  and  Aristenus. 

The  Canons  of  the  Council  of  Nice  with  notes  ut  supra  and  so  throughout. 

1  As  one  of  the  few  books  of  the  Eastern  Church  ever  translated  into  a  Western  tongue,  the  reader  may  be  glad  to  have  its  full 
title.  Compendium  des  Kanonischen  Rechtes  der  einen  heiligen,  allgemeinen  und  apostoliochen  Kirche  verfaszt  von  Andreas  Frei- 
herrn  von  Schaguna.    Hermannstadt,  Buchdruckerei  des  Josef  Droklieff,  1868. 

VOL.    XIV.  b 


xviii  BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  INTRODUCTION 


The  Canons  of  the  Council  of  Constantinople. 
The  Canons  of  the  Council  of  Ephesus. 
The  Canons  of  the  Council  of  Chalcedon. 

The  Canons  of  the  Sixth  Council  in  Trallo. 

The  Canons  of  the  Seventh  (Ecumenical  Council. 

The  Canons  of  the  Council  of  Constantinople  called  the  First-and-Second  [in  the 
time  of  Photius]. 

The  Canons  of  the  Council  held  in  the  Temple  of  Wisdom  [which  confirmed  the 
Seventh  (Ecumenical   Synod] .     All  these  with  notes  as  before. 

The  Canons  of  the  Council  of  Carthage  [over  which  St.  Cyprian,  the  Martyr,  pre- 
sided] with  the  notes  of  Balsamon  and  Zonaras. 

The  Canons  of  the  Council  of  Ancyra. 

The  Canons  of  the  Council  of  Neocsesarea. 

The  Canons  of  the  Council  of  Gangra. 

The  Canons  of  the  Council  of  Antioch. 

The  Canons  of  the  Council  of  Laodicea. 

The  Canons  of  the  Council  of  Sardica.     All  these  with  full  notes  as  before. 

The  Canons  of  the  217  blessed  Fathers  who  met  at  Carthage,  with  the  epitome,  and 
scholia  by  Balsamon  and  Aristenus,  and  on  the  actual  canons  by  Zonaras  also.  To 
these  some  epistles  are  added,  likewise  annotated. 

Then,  ending  Volume  I.  is  a  version  of  Josephus  iEgyptius's  Arabic  Introduction 
and  Paraphrase  on  the  Canons  of  the  first  four  General  Councils,  bearing  the  following 
title  : 

Josephi  iEgyptii  Proaemia  et  Paraphrasis  Arabica  in  Quatuor  Preorum  Generalium 
Conciliorum  Canones,  interprete  Guilielmo  Beverigio,  the  Arabic  being  given  in  the 
left  hand  column. 

Volume  II. 
Part  I. 

The  Canons  of  Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  with  the  scholia  of  Balsamon  and  Zonaras. 

The  Canons  of  Peter  of  Alexandria. 

The  Canons  of  Gregory  Thaumaturgus. 

The  Canons  of  St.  Athanasius.     All  these  with  scholia  as  above. 

The  Canons  of  St.  Basil,  with  the  Ancient  Epitome  and  scholia  of  Balsamon,  Zona- 
ras, and  Aristenus. 

The  Canons  of  St.  Gregory  Nyssen  with  scholia  of  Balsamon. 

The  Canonical  Answer  of  Timothy,  Bishop  of  Alexandria. 

The  Canons  of  Theophilus  of  Alexandria. 

The  Canonical  Epistles  of  Cyril  of  Alexandria. 

Extracts  from  the  metrical  poems  of  St.  Gregory  Theologus,  concerning  what  books 
of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  should  be  read. 

Extracts  from  the  iambics  of  St.  Amphilochius  the  bishop  to  Seleucus  on  the  same 
subject. 

The  Encyclical  Letter  of  Gennadius,  Patriarch  of  Constantinople. 

The  Epistle  of  Tarasius,  Patriarch  of  Constantinople,  to  Adrian,  Pope  of  Rome,  con- 
cerning simony.     All  of  these  with  Balsamon's  scholia. 

Part  II. 

The  Sjmopsis  by  Alexius  Aristenus  of  the  letters  called  Canonical. 

The  questions  of  Certain  Monks  and  the  Answers  sent  by  the  Synod  of  Constantino- 
ple.    With  notes  by  Balsamon.1 

The  Alphabetical  Syntagma  of  all  that  is  contained  in  the  Sacred  and  Divine  Can- 
ons, by  Mathew  Blastares,  the  Monk.2 

Concerning  the  Holy  and  (Ecumenical  Synod  which  restored  Photius,  the  most  holy 
Patriarch  to  the  See  of  Constantinople,  and  dissolved  the  scandal  of  the  two  Churches 

1  According  to  the  Eleuchus,  in  the  beginning  of  this  volume,  both  of  these  writings  are  found  in  the  First  Part  and  not  in  the 
econd  Part  of  the  volume. 

2  Schoell  says  that  the  test  is  not  accurately  given. 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  INTRODUCTION  xix 

of  Old  and  New  Borne  ;  [Styled  by  some  the  "  Eighth  CEcumenical  Synod."]  to  which 
is  added  the  Letter  of  the  Blessed  John  Pope  of  Borne  to  the  most  holy  Photius, 
Archbishop  of  Constantinople. 

An  Index  Berum  et  Verborum  of  both  volumes. 

Beveridge's  own  Notes  on  the  Canons  of  the  Councils. 

An  Index  Berum  et  Verborum  of  the  Notes. 

Such  are  the  contents  of  Bishop  Beveridge's  great  work,  and  it  is  impossible  to 
exaggerate  its  value.  But  it  will  be  noticed  that  it  only  covers  the  disciplinary  action 
of  the  Councils,  and  does  not  give  the  dogmatic  decrees,  these  being  excluded  from  the 
author's  plan. 

Before  leaving  the  collections  of  the  canons  we  must  mention  the  great  work  of 
Justellus  (the  Preface  and  notes  of  which  are  found  reprinted  in  Migne's  Pat.  Lai.,  Tom. 
LXVII.) ;  Canonwn  Ecclesice  Universal  Gr.  et  Lot.  cum  Prcefatione  Notisque  Christoph. 
Justelli. 

The  author  was  counsellor  and  secretary  to  the  King  of  France,  was  born  in  Paris 
1580,  and  died  in  1649.  After  his  death  there  appeared  at  Paris  in  1661  a  work  in  2 
volumes  folio,  with  the  following  title  :  Bibliotheca  juris  canonici  vetus  .  .  .  ex  an- 
tiquis  codicibus  MSS.  Bibliothecce  Ghristopheri  Justelli.  .  .  .  Opera  et  studio  Gul. 
Voelli  et  Henrici  Justelli. 

The  Church  in  Paris  had  the  honour  of  having  among  its  Cathedral  clergy  the  first 
scholar  who  published  a  collection  of  the  Acts  of  the  councils.  James  Merlin  was 
Canon  and  Grand  Penitentiary  of  the  Metropolitan  Church,  and  the  first  edition  of  his 
work  he  put  out  in  1523  in  one  volume  folio.  This  work  passed  through  several  edi- 
tions within  a  few  years,  but  soon  gave  place  to  fuller  collections.1 

In  1538,  the  Belgian  Franciscan  Peter  Crabbe  (Pierre  Grable)  issued  at  Cologne  an 
enlarged  collection  in  two  volumes,  and  the  second  edition  in  1551  was  enlarged  to 
three  folio  volumes.  Besides  these,  there  was  Lawrence  Surius's  still  more  complete 
collection,  published  in  1557  (4  vols,  folio),  and  the  Venice  collection  compiled  by  Dom- 
enick  Bollauus,  O.  P.,  and  printed  by  Dominic  Nicolini,  1585  (5  vols,  folio). 

But  the  renowned  collection  of  Professor  Severin  Binius  surpassed  all  its  predeces- 
sors, and  its  historical  and  critical  notes  are  quoted  with  respect  even  to-day.  The  first 
edition,  in  four  volumes  folio,  was  issued  at  Cologne  in  1606,  and  later  editions,  better 
than  the  first,  in  1618  and  1636.  This  last  edition  was  published  at  Paris  in  nine  vol- 
umes, and  made  use  of  the  Boman  collection. 

To  the  learned  Jesuit  Sirmond  belongs  the  chief  glory  of  having  compiled  this  Bo- 
man collection,  and  the  "  Introduction  "  is  from  his  pen.  The  work  was  undertaken 
by  the  authority  of  Pope  Paul  V.,  and  much  of  the  Greek  text,  copied  from  MSS.  in  the 
Vatican  Library,  was  now  for  the  first  time  given  to  the  reading  public.  This  collection 
contains  only  the  Ecumenical  Councils  according  to  the  Boman  method  of  reckoning, 
and  its  compilation  took  from  1608  to  1612. 

No  collection  appeared  from  this  date  until  the  "  Collectio  Begia,"  a  magnificent 
series  of  thirty-seven  volumes  folio,  at  the  royal  press  at  Paris  in  1644.  But  while  it 
was  superb  in  get  up,  it  left  much  to  be  desired  when  looked  at  critically,  for  many 
faults  of  the  Boman  edition  already  pointed  out  by  Sirmond  were  not  corrected. 

And  now  we  have  reached  the  time  when  the  first  really  great  Concilia  ap- 
peared, which  while  only  filling  seventeen  volumes  in  folio  was  yet  far  more  complete 
— Hefele  says  twenty-five  per  cent,  more  complete — than  the  great  Collectio  Begia 
just  described.  This  edition  was  the  work  of  Philip  Labbe  (Labbeus  in  Latin),  S.  J., 
and  was  completed  after  his  death  in  1667,  by  Father  Gabriel  Cossart  of  the  same 
Society — "  Almost  all  the  French  savants  quote  from  this  edition  of  Labbe's  with 
Baluze's  supplement,"  2  and  I  have  followed  their  lead,  availing  myself  of  the  corrections 

1  I  am  indebted  to  Hefele,  History  of  the  Councils,  Vol.  I.,  p.  67  et  seqq.,  for  this  account  of  Merlin's  Collection,  as  also  for  most 
of  the  statements  that  follow.  Hefele  says  (footnote  to  page  67) :  "The  longest  details  on  Merlin's  edition  are  found  in  a  work  of 
Salmon,  Doctor  and  Librarian  of  the  Sorbonne,  Traite  de  V Etude  des  Conciles  et  de  leurs  Collections,  etc.    Paris,  1726.  " 

s  Hefele,  Hist.  Councils,  vol.  I,  p.  69. 


xx  BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  INTRODUCTION 

made  by  later  editors.  The  title  of  the  edition  used  in  this  work  is :  "  Sacrasancta 
Concilia  ad  Regiam  Editionem  exacta.  Studio  Philip.  Labbei  et  Gabr.  Cossartii,  Soc. 
Jesu  Presbyterorum.  Lutetiae  Parisioram.  MDCLXXI.  Cum  Privilegio  Regis  Chris- 
tianissimi." 

Anything  more  perfect  than  these  precious  volumes  it  would  be  hard  to  conceive  of, 
and  while  of  course  they  contain  the  errors  of  chronology  et  cetera  of  their  age,  yet  their 
general  accuracy  and  marvellous  completeness  leave  them  even  to-day  as  the  greatest 
of  the  great,  although  the  later  edition  of  Hardouin  is  more  often  used  by  English  and 
American  scholars,  and  is  the  one  quoted  by  Pope  Benedict  XIV.  in  his  famous 
work  De  Synodo  Dicecesana.  Hardouin's  edition  did  certainly  correct  many  of  the 
faults  of  Labbe  and  Cossart,  yet  had  itself  many  faults  and  defects  which  are  pointed 
out  by  Salmon '  in  a  long  list,  although  he  fully  acknowledges  the  value  of  Hardouin's 
improvements  and  additions.  Perhaps,  not  unnaturally,  as  a  Professor  at  the  Sorbonne, 
he  preferred  Labbe  and  Cossart.  It  may  not  be  amiss  to  add  that  Hardouin  was  very 
anti-Gallican  and  ultramontane. 

The  Domiuican  Archbishop  of  Lucca,  Mansi,  in  1759,  put  out  his  "  Concilia  "  in 
thirty-one  volumes  folio  at  Florence,  styled  on  the  title-page  "  the  most  ample  "  edition 
ever  printed,  and  claiming  to  contain  all  the  old  and  much  new  matter.  It  was  never 
finished,  only  reaching  to  the  XVth  century,  has  no  indices,  and  (says  Hefele)  "is  very 
inferior  to  Hardouin  in  accuracy.  The  order  of  the  subjects  in  the  later  volumes  is 
sometimes  not  sufficiently  methodical,  and  is  at  variance  with  the  chronology."  2 

I  shall  now  present  the  reader  with  some  bibliographical  notes  which  I  extract  ver- 
batim from  Hefele  (Hefele,  History  of  the  Councils,  Vol.  I.,  p.  74). 

Among  the  numerous  works  on  the  history  of  the  councils,  the  most  useful  to  con- 
sult are : 

1.  John  Cabassutius,  Notitia  ecclesiastica  historiarum  conciliorum  et  canonum. 
Lyons  1680,  folio.     Very  often  reprinted. 

2.  Hermant,  Histoire  des  Conciles,  Rouen  1730,  four  volumes,  8vo. 

3.  Labbe,  Syno]Jsis  historica  Conciliorum,  in  vol.  i.  of  his  Collection  of  Councils. 

4.  Edm.  Richer,  Historia  conciliorum  generalium  (Paris,  1680),  three  volumes,  4to. 
Reprinted  in  8vo.  at  Cologne. 

5.  Charles  Ludovic  Richard,  Analysis  conciliorum  generalium  et  particularium. 
Translated  from  French  into  Latin  by  Dalmasus.  Four  volumes,  8vo,  Augsburg, 
1778. 

6.  Christ.  AVilh.  Franz  Walch,  Entwurf  einer  vollstandigen  Historie  der  Kirchenver- 
sammlungen,  Leipzig,  1759. 

7.  Fabricius,  Bibliotheca  Grceca,  edit.  Harless.  t.  xii.,  p.  422  sqq.,  in  which  is  con- 
tained an  alphabetical  table  of  all  the  councils,  and  an  estimate  of  the  value  of  the  prin- 
cipal collections. 

8.  Alletz,  Concilien-Lexikon,  translated  from  French  into  German  by  Father  Maurus 
Disch,  a  Benedictine  and  professor  at  Augsburg,  1843. 

9.  Dictionnaire  universel  et  complet  des  Conciles,  tant  generaux  que  particidicrs,  etc., 

redige  parM.  l'abbe  P ,  pretre  du  Diocese  de  Paris,  published  by  the  Abbe  Migne 

(Paris,  1846),  two  volumes,  4to. 

In  the  great  works  on  ecclesiastical  history — for  example,  in  the  Nouvelle  Biblio- 
theqtie  des  Auteurs  Ecclesiastiques,  by  El.  Dupin,  and  the  Historia  Literaria  of  Cave,  and 
particularly  in  the  excellent  Histoire  des  Auteurs  Sacres,  by  Remi  Ceillier — we  find  mat- 
ter relating  to  the  history  of  the  councils.  Salmon,  1.  c,  p.  387,  and  Walch  in  his  His- 
toric der  Kirchenversammlungen,  pp.  48-67,  have  pointed  out  a  large  number  of  works 
on  the  history  of  the  councils.  There  are  also  very  valuable  dissertations  on  the  same 
subject  in — 

1.  Christian  Lupus,  Synodorum  generalium  ac  provincialium  decreta  et  canones, 
scholiis,  notis  ac  historica  actorum  dissertatione  illustrata,  Louv.,  1665  ;  Brussels,  1673  ; 
five  volumes,  4to. 

1  Salmon,  I.  c,  pp.  315-331,  786-831.  2  Hefele,  Hist.  Councils,  vol.  1,  p.  72. 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL   INTRODUCTION  xxi 

2.  Laid.  Thomassin,  Dissertationum  in  Concilia  generalia  et  particular ia,  t.  i.,  Paris, 
1667 ;  reprinted  in  Rocaberti,  Bibl.  pontificia,  tr.  XV. 

3.  Van  Espen,  Tractatus  Historicus  exhibens  scholia  in  omnes  canones  conciliorum,  etc., 
in  his  complete  works. 

4.  Barth.  Caranza  has  written  a  very  complete  and  useful  abstract  of  the  acts  of  the 
councils  in  his  Summa  Conciliorum,  which  has  often  been  re-edited. 

5.  George  Daniel  Fuchs,  deacon  of  Stuttgart,  has,  in  his  BibliotheJc  tier  Kirchenver- 
sammlungen,  four  volumes,  Leipsic,  1780-1784,  given  German  translations  and  abstracts 
of  the  acts  of  the  councils  in  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries. 

6.  Francis  Salmon,  Doctor  and  Librarian  of  the  Sorbonne,  has  published  an  Intro- 
duction to  the  Study  of  the  Councils,  in  his  Traite  de  V  Etude  des  Conciles  et  de  leurs 
collections,  Paris,  1724,  in  4to,  which  has  often  been  reprinted. 

To  these  I  would  add  the  following  : 

1.  Fleury,  Histoire  Ecclesiastique.  This  work  in  many  volumes,  part  of  which 
has  been  translated  into  English,  is  most  useful  and  accurate,  and  contains  a  resume  of 
the  separate  canons  and  definitions  as  well  as  the  history  of  the  proceedings. 

2.  Denziger,  Enchiridion  Symbolorum  et  Definitionum  quai  de  rebus  Jidei  et  morum 
a  Conciliis  (Ecumenicis  et  Summis  Pontificibus  emanarunt.  A  most  useful  handbook  in 
the  original. 

3.  Hefele,  Conciliengeschicte.  This,  the  most  recent  work  upon  the  subject,  is  also 
in  some  respects  the  most  satisfactory,  and  it  is  a  matter  of  real  regret  that  only  the 
first  part  of  the  work,  down  to  the  end  of  the  Seventh  (Ecumenical  Council,  has  been 
translated  into  English.  The  last  volume  of  the  author's  revised  edition  appeared  in 
1890.  The  first  volume  of  the  first  edition  was  published  in  1855,  and  the  seventh  and 
last  in  1874.  The  entire  book  was  translated  into  French  some  years  ago  (with  full 
indices)  by  M.  l'abbe  Goschlerand  and  M.  l'abbe  Delarc  (Paris,  Adrien  le  Clere  et  Cie). 
It  should  in  fairness,  however,  be  remarked  that  Bishop  Hefele  was  one  of  the  minority 
who  opposed  the  opportuneness  of  the  definition  of  Papal  infallibility  at  the  Vatican 
Council,  and  while  indeed  afterwards  he  submitted  to  the  final  decree,  yet  he  has  been 
a  somewhat  suspected  person  since  to  those  who  held  extreme  views  on  this  doctrine. 

So  far  as  I  am  aware  no  serious  work  has  been  done  upon  the  councils  by  any  writer 
using  the  English  tongue  in  recent  times,  with  the  exception  of  the  useful  Notes  on  the 
Canons  of  the  First  Four  General  Councils,  by  Canon  Win.  Bright. 

The  following  is  a  list  of  the  English  translations  which  I  have  consulted  or  fol- 
lowed : 

John  Johnson,  The  Clergyman's  Vade-mecum  (London,  2d  Ed.,  1714). 

Wm.  A.  Hammond,  The  Definitions  of  Faith  and  Canons  of  Discipline  of  the  Six 
(Ecumenical  Councils,  etc.  (Oxford.  1843.) 

William  Lambert,  The  Canons  of  the  First  Four  General  Councils  of  the  Church 
and  those  of  the  Early  Greek  Synods  (London,  s.  d.     Preface  dated  1868). 

John  Fulton,  Index  Canonum.  [This  work  ends  with  the  Council  of  Chalcedon.] 
(New  York,  1872.     3d  Ed.,  1892.) 

John  Mendham,  The  Seventh  General  Council,  the  Second  of  Nice  (London,  s.  d.). 

H.  B.  Percival,  The  Decrees  of  the  Seven  Ecumenical  Synods.  Appendix  I.  to  A 
Digest  of  Theology  (London,  Masters,  1893). 

It  only  remains  that  I  mention  two  other  works. 

Dr.  Pusey's  book,  The  Councils  of  the  Church  from  the  Council  of  Jerusalem  A.D.  51 
to  the  Council  of  Constantinople,  381  (1857)  should  not  be  omitted,  and  certainly  the 
reader's  attention  should  be  called  to  that  most  accurate  and  valuable  volume  by 
Herm.  Theod.  Bruns,  Canones  Apostolorum  et  Conciliorum  Veterum  Selecti  (Berolini, 
1839),  which  has  been  constantly  referred  to  in  preparing  this  work. 


APPENDED  NOTE    ON    THE   EASTERN  EDITIONS   OF  SYNOD- 

ICAL  LITERATURE. 

From  the  presses  of  the  East,  especially  those  at  Athens,  a  number  of  editions  more 
or  less  complete  of  the  Greek  text  of  the  Canons  of  trie  Ecumenical  and  of  the  Local 
Councils  have  been  issued,  and  the  notes  of  Balsamon,  Zonaras,  and  Aristenus  have 
been  added  in  some  cases.  Professor  BolotofF  writes  however  that  so  far  as  Greek  litera- 
ture on  the  subject  is  concerned,  with  the  exception  of  purely  topographical  researches 
in  the  environs  of  Constantinople,  it  is  simply  putting  into  Greek  what  was  originally 
in  German. 

The  Eussian  Church  has  done  somewhat  more  and  as  will  be  seen  from  the  follow- 
ing table,  some  attempts  have  been  made  at  providing  scholia,  but  when  the  scheme  of 
this  present  work  was  shewn  him,  Professor  Bolotoff  said  :  "We  have  nothing  analo- 
gous to  this  undertaking  in  Russia."  The  learned  professor  remarks  that  all  the  best 
Russian  literature  upon  the  subject  is  contained  in  magazine  articles,  especially  those 
of  Professor  Zaozersky  of  the  Moscow  Theological  Academy,  and  of  Professor  A.  S. 
Pavloff,  of  the  University  of  Moscow ;  he  mentions  also  the  latter's  article  in  the  Ortho- 
dox Revieio,  and  adds  that  "An  Essay  on  a  Course  of  Church  Legislation,"  by  Joann 
Smolensk  (St.  Petersburg,  1851)  should  be  referred  to. 


BIBLIOGRAFICESKIJ  UKAZATEL'  PECATNYH  IZDANIJ  APOSTOL'SKIH 
I  SOBORNYH  PRAVIL  NA  SLAVJANSKOM  I  RUSSKOM  JAZYKAH. 

V  pravoslavnoj  Russkoj  Cerkvi  izdanija  sobornyh  pravil  i  opredelenij  soversalis' 
tol'ko  po  neposredstvennomu  rasporjazeniju  i  soizvoleniju  vyssej  cerknovnoj  vlasti  i 
fakticeski  izjaty  iz  kompetencii  castnoj  ucenoj  predpriimcivosti.  Poetomu  podrobnyja 
izdanija  vypuskalis'  v  Rossii  lis'  po  mere  prakticeskoj  potrebnosti. 

(1)  Pervoe  po  vremeni  pecatnoe  izdanie  nazvannyh  pravil  bylo  v  slavjanskoj  "Kormcej 
Knige"  (=grec.  Ylri§a\.iov),  kotoraja  nacata  pecataniem  pri  Moskovskom  patriarhe  Iosife 
v  Moskve  7  go  oktjabrja  1649  g.  i  okoncena  lgo  ijulja  1650  g.,  no  patr.  Nikon  podverg 
ego  sobornomu  peresmotru,  pri  cem  neskol'ko  listov  bylo  perepecatano  i  vneseno  vnov'.1 
Po  semu  ekzempljary  etoj  "Kormcej"  byli  razoslany  po  cerkvam  dlja  cerkovnago  upotre- 
blenija  i  postupili  v  obrascenie  ne  ranee  1653  g.  Vtoroe  izdanie  "Kormcej"  bylo  v  1787  g. 
posle  peresmotra  eja  mitropolitom  Novgorodskim  i  S.  Peterburgskim  Gavriilom,2  a 
zatem  i  drugija  (napr.,  v  1804  g.,  1816  g.  i  1823  g.)  bez  osobyh  peremen.  Pozdnejsija 
izdanija  otlicajutsja  ot  Nikonovskago  v  castnostjak,  no  eto  ne  kasaetsja  cerkovnyh  pravil, 
kotoryja  pomescajutsja  v  pervoj  casti  "Kormcej"  i  soderzat  85  apostol'skih  pravil,  pos- 
tanovlenija  16 -i  soborov  (Nikejskago,  Ankirskago,  Neokesarijskago,  Gangrskago,  Antiohij- 
skago,  Laodikijskago,  Il-go,  Ul-go,  IV-go  vselenskih,  Sardikskago,  Karfagenskago,  Kon- 
stantinopol'skago,  pri  Nekoparge,  TrulVskago  692  g.,  Vll-go  vselenskago,  Dvukratnago  i  v 
cerkvi  sv.  Sofii)  i  pravila  13-ti  sv.  otcov. 

(2)  V  pecatnoj  "Kormcej"  kanony  izlozeny  ne  v  polnom  tekste,  a  v  sokrascennom, 
inogda  dajuscem  lis'  ves'ma  nedostatocnoe  predstavlenie  o  soderzanii  podlinnika.  Poetomu 
izdavna  delalis'  popytki  celostnyh  perevodov,3  no  poslednie  ne  pojavljalis'  v  pecati.  Tol'ko 
uze  v  1839  g.  sv.  Sinodom  vypusceno  bylo  v  S.  Peterburge  takoe  izdanie:  "Kniga  pravil 

1  Poetomu  nekotorye  bibliografy  sjiravecllivo  scitajut  zdes'  dva  izdanija,  iz  koih  1653  g.  —  in  folio  —  sostoit  iz  37  + 1  + 
60 -f- 1  + 16  -f  679  listov  i  bylo  perepecatano  staroobrjadeami  (raskol'nikami)  v  1785  g.  v  Varsave. 

2  Eto  izdanie  in  folio  v  Moskve  v  dvuli  castjah  i  knigah  —  v  1-j  2  nenum.  -f  38  +  5 -f- 60  +  300  +  39  numerovannyh  listov, 
—  VO  2-j  1  +  2  +  235  + 16  +  37  listo v. 

3  Vo  vtoroj  polovine  XVII  v.  perevodil  kanony  Epifanij  Slavineckij,  a  v  pervoj  polovine  XVIII  v.  pravila  apostol'ski- 
ja  i  sobornyja  byli  perevedeny  Vasiliem  Kozlovskim  i  Grigoriem  Poletikoju  po  greceskomu  tekstu  "Synodicon"  a 
Beveregii,  s  kakovago  izdanija  sdelan  byl  novyj  perevod  v  1782  g. 


xxiv  APPENDED   NOTE   ON   SYNODICAL   LITERATURE 

sv.  apostol,  sv.  soborov  vselenskih  i  pomestnyh  i  sv.  otec  ",  napecatannaja  v  bol'soj  list  v 
"carstvujuscem  grade  sv.  Petra  pervyni  tisneniem,  v  leto  ot  sozclanija  mira  7347,  ot 
Rozdestva  ze  po  ploti  Boga  Slova  1839,  indikta  12";  v  nem  4  nenumerovannye  lista  i 
455  numerovannyh  strannic.  Na  kazdoj  strannice  dve  kolonny  dlja  podlinnika  i  novago 
slavjanskago  perevoda  po  polnomu  tekstu,  no  bez  tolkovanij  vizantijskih  kanonistov; 
redko  na  osnovanii  Zonary  ili  Val'samona  dajutsja  primecanija,  ne  vsegda  tocnyja  isto- 
riceski  (napr.  k  10  pravilu  Ankirsk.,  3  Sard.,  4  Karfag.  i  o  dvukratnom  sobore  861  g.), 
a  po  mestam  i  samyj  tekst  ne  ispraven  (napr.,  v  13-m  prav.  I-go  vsel.  sobora).  Eta 
"Kniga"  imela  potom  sledujuscija  izdanija:  (2)  v  Moskve  v  Sinodal'noj  tipografii  v  1862, 
in  folio  8  11.+ 672 +  74  numer.  strn.,  s  tekstom  greceskim  i  slavjanskim  (3)  ibid,  v  1866  g. 
in  quarto,  3  11.+ 373  strn.+  l  1.+  59  strn.,  s  odnim  slavjanskim  tekstom;  (4)  ibid,  v  1874  g., 
in  octavo,  411. +  455  strn.  +  2 11.+ 104 +  4  strn.,  toze  s  odnim  slavjanskim  tekstom; 
(5)  ibid,  v  1886  g.,  in  folio,  3  11.+ 395 +42  strn.+  l  1.,  opjat'  v  odnom  slavjanskom  tekste. 
(3)  "Kniga  pravil"  nicut'  ne  predstavljaet  avtorizovannago  textus  receptus,  i  posle  eja 
izdanija  sam  Sv.  Sinod  ne  redko  privodil  v  svoih  ukazah  pravila  po  slavjanskoj  redakcii 
"Kormcej  knigi,"  a  potom  rekomendoval  Afinskoe  izdanie  "Sintagmy"  dlja  vseh  duhovno- 
ucebnyh  zavedenij.  Eto  otkryvalo  mesto  dlja  novoj  obrabotki,  kotoraja  s  razresenija 
vyssej  duhovnoj  vlasti  i  byla  predprinjata  Moskovskim  "Obscestvoni  ljubitelej  duhov- 
nago  prosvescenija".  Objavlenie  ob  etom  bylo  sdelano  v  N-re  3  "Moskovskih  Eparhialnyh 
Cerkovnyli  Vedomostej"  za  1875  g.,  a  v  janvarskoj  knizke  togoze  goda  Moskovskago 
zurnala  "Ctenija  v  Obscestve  ljubitelej  duhovnago  prosvescenija"  byla  napecatana  i  samaja 
"programma"  izdanija  (strn.  79-90  v  otdele  bibliografii.  Po  povodu  eja  professor  kanoni- 
ceskago  prava  v  Novororossijskom  Universitete  (skoncavsijsja  16go  avgusta  1898  g.  pro- 
fessorom  Moskovskago  Universiteta)  Aleksej  Stepanovic  Pavlov  sdelal  "Zamecanija  na 
programmu  izdanija,  v  russkom  perevode,  cerkovnyli  pravil  s  tolkovanijami "  v  "Zapiskah 
Imperatorskago  Novorossijskago  Universiteta",  t.  XVI  (Odessa  1875  g.)  strn.  1-17 
prilozenij  (i  v  otdeTnoj  brosure),  a  posle  perepecatal  ih — s  nekotorymi  dopolnenijami — 
v  Moskovskom  zurnale  "Pravoslavnoe  Obozrenie"  za  aprel'  1876  g.  (strn.  730-746)  pod 
zaglaviem  "O  novom  perevode  tolkovanij  na  cerkovnyja  pravila".  Na  eti  vozrazenija 
otvecal  professor  cerkovnago  prava  v  Moskovskoj  Duhovnoj  Akademii  Aleksandr  Feo- 
dorovic  Lavrov  v  zurnale  "Ctenija  v  Obscestve  ljubitelej  duhovnago  prosvescenija"  (6.  II, 
strn.  158-194  za  1877  g.)  "Pecatnym  pis'mom  k  Alekseju  Stepanovicu  Pavlovu".  Tak 
postepenno  opredelilsja  plan  izdanija,  kotoroe  pecatalos'  snacala  v  prilozenijah  k  zurnalu 
"Ctenija  v  Obscestve  i  pr.",  a  potom  javilos'  i  otdel'no  in  octavo  v  sledujuscih  vypuskah: 
(a)  I-j  "Pravila  svjatih  Apostol  s  tolkovanijami"  v  dvuh  izdanijah — Moskva  1876  g. 
iz  "Ctenij  1875  g.,  strn.  1-163)  4  +  12  +  175  strn.,  i  ibid.  1887  g.,  5+12  +  163  strn.;  II-j 
"Pravila  svjatyh  vselennyh  soborov  s  tolkovanijami"  (iz  "Ctenij"  1875  g.,  strn.  165-328; 
1876  g.,  strn.  329-680;  1877  g.,  strn.  681-900)  v  dvuh  castjah:  1-ja  "pravila  soborov 
1-4"  Moskva  1877  g.,  260  strn.,  2-ja  "pravila  soborov  5-7"  ibid.,  736  strn.;  b)  "Pravila 
svjatyh  pomestnyh  soborov  s  tolkovanijami"  toze  v  dvuh  vypuskah  (iz  "Ctenij"  1877  g., 
strn.'900-1066;  1878  g.,  strn.  1067-1306;  1879  g.,  strn.  1307-1410:  1-j  (pravila  soborov 
Ankirskago,  Neokesarijskago,  Gangrskago,  Antiohijskago,  Laodikijskago  i  Sardikijskago) 
Moskva  1880,  strn.  359;  2-j  (pravila  soborov  Karfagenskago  [s  poslanijami  k  pape 
Vonifatiju  i  pape  Kelestinu],  Konstantinoporskago,  Dvulo^atnago  i  vo  hrame  premudrosti 
slova  Bozija)  ibid.  1881,  strn.  876;  c)  "Pravila  svjatyh  otec  s  tolkovanijami"  ibid.  1884, 
strn.  626.  Pri  nih  imeetsja  otdeTnyj  "Ukazatel'  predmetov,  soderzascihsja  v  izdanii 
pravil  apostol'skih,  sobornyh  i  svjatyh  otcev  s  tolkovanijami",  Moskva  1888,  58  strn.  in 
octavo.  Greceskij  tekst  pravil  privoditsja  po  izdaniju  ^vvTay/xa  twv  ®eia>v  teal  iepwv 
Kavovcov  .  .  .  biro  T.  A.  PdWr)  ical  M.  IIo'tXt?,  ' 'Adrjvrjaiv  1852-1854,  rjadom  s  nim  po- 
mescajetsja  doslovnyj  slavjanskij  perevod  tolkovanij  vizantijskih  kommentatorov  (Zonary, 
Aristina,  Val'samona),  tekst  i  tolkovanija  slavjanskoj  Kormcej;  vse  eto  soprovozdaetsja 
vydanijami  i  vsjakago  roda  pojasnenijami  (istoriceskimi,  filologiceskimi  i  t.  p.).     Izdanie 


APPENDED   NOTE   ON   SYNODIOAL   LITERATUKE  xxv 

eto  specialistami  spravedlivo  scitaetsja  ves'ma  cennym  v  naucnom  otnosenii.  Glavnym 
redaktororu  i  dejatelem  ego  byl  prof.  A.  F.  Lavrov  (v  monasestve  Aleksij,  skoncavsijsja 
arhiepiskopom  Litovskim  i  Vilenskim),  no  privlekalis'  k  ucastiju  mnogija  drugija  lica  i 
mezdu  nimi  prof.  A.  S.  Pavlov. 

(4)  Russkij  perevod  pravil  imeetsja  tol'ko  pri  izdanijah  Kazanskoj  Duhovnoj  Akademii: 
a)  "Dejanija  vselenskih  soborov  v  perevode  na  russkij  jazyk",  1. 1  VII  (7),  Kazan'  1859- 
1878  (nekotorye  tomy  vo  vtorom  izdanii)  i  b)  "Dejanija  devjati  pomestnyh  soborov  v 
perevode  na  russkij  jazyk",  odin  torn,  Kazan'  1878.  Etot  perevod  sdelan  po  porucenii 
Sv.  Sinoda,  a  pravila  peredajutsja  v  nem  po  tekstu  sobornyh  dejanij. 

Iz  predstavlennago  ocerka  pecatnyk  izdanij  sobornyh  pravil  vidno,  cto  oni  —  v  predelah 
svoej  fakticeskoj  primenimosti  —  pocitajutsja  istocnikom  dejstvujuscago  prava  v 
Russkoj  pravoslavnoj  cerkvi,  pocemu  dlja  neja  osobennuju  vaznost'  imejut  lis'  av- 
toritetnyja  vizantijskija,  tolkovanija,  o  kotoryh  suscestvujut  izsledovanija  V.  Demidova, 
harakter  i  znacenie  tolkovanij  na  kanoniceskij  kodeks  greceskoj  cerkvi  —  Aristina, 
Zonary  i  Val'samona  —  v  "Pravoslavnom  Obozrenii"  t.  II-j  za  1888  g.,  Kazanskago 
prof.  V.  A.  Narbskago,  Tolkovanija  Val'samona  na  nomokanon  Fotija,  Kazan'  1889,  i 
Jur'evskago  (=  Derptskago)  prof.  M.  U.  Krasnozena,  Tolkovateli  kanoniceskago  kodeksa 
vostocnoj  cerkvi:  Aristin,  Zonara  i  Val'samon,  Moskva  1892. 

OtdeTnyh  naucnyh  tolkovanij  vseh  sobornyh  pravil  v  russkoj  literature  net,  no  oni 
izlagajutsja  i  razjasnjajutsja  v  kursah  cerkovnago  prava  (arhimandrit.  [f  ep.  Smolens- 
kago]  Ioanna,  prof.  N.  S.  Suvorova,  I.  S.  Berdnikova,  P.  A.  Laskareva,  M.  A.  Ostrou- 
mova),  v  socinenijah  po  istorii  vselenskih  soborov  (ep.  Ioanna,  prof.  Alekseja  Petrovica 
Lebedeva),  v  kanoniceskih  i  cerkovno-istoriceskih  monografijah.  Kasatel'no  kriticeskago 
izdanija  podlinnago  teksta  pravil  est'  ucenaja  i  poleznaja  stat'ja  (o  knige  Fr.  Lauchert, 
Die  Kanones  usw.,  Freiburg  i.  Br.  und  Leipzig  1896)  professora  cerkovnnoj  istorii  v 
S.  Peterburgskoj  Duhovnoj  Akademii  Vasilija  Vasilievica  Bolotova  v  "Hristianskom 
Ctenii",  vyp.     IV- j  za  1896  g.,  strn.  178-195. 

Professor  S. -Peterburgskoj  Duhovnoj  Akademii 
po  kafedre  Sv.  Pisanija  Novago  Zaveta 
Nikolaj  Gltjbokovskij. 
S.-Peterburg,  1898,  X,  1 1- voskresenie. 

A  BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  INDEX  OF  THE  PRINTED  EDITIONS  OF  THE 
CANONS  OF  THE  APOSTLES  AND  OF  THE  COUNCILS  IN  THE 
SLAVONIC  AND  RUSSIAN  LANGUAGES. 

(Prepared  by  Nicolas  Glubokoffski,  Professor  of  the  Chair  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  of 
the  New  Testament  in  the  Ecclesiastical  Academy  of  St.  Petersburgh.) l 

In  the  orthodox  Russian  Church,  editions  of  the  Conciliar  Canons  and  Decrees 
have  only  been  issued  under  the  immediate  disposition  and  sanction  of  the  supreme 
ecclesiastical  authority,  and,  in  fact,  are  amongst  those  things  which  it  is  not  within 
the  competence  of  private  scholars  to  undertake.  Such  editions  therefore  have  been 
published  in  Russia  only  in  accordance  with  practical  requirements. 

1.  The  earliest  printed  edition  of  the  afore-mentioned  canons  appeared  in  the  Sla- 
vonic "  Kormchaja  Kniga  "2  (=  Gk.  itt]M\iqv),  the  printing  of  which  was  commenced  at 
Moscow,  on  October  7th,  1649,  under  the  Patriarch  Joseph  of  Moscow,  and  was  finished 
on  July  1,  1650  ;  but  the  Patriarch  Nicon  caused  it  to  be  submitted  to  a  Council  for 
revision,  in  consequence  of  which  certain  pages  were  reprinted  and  inserted  afresh  into 
it.3    Thereupon  copies  of  this  "  Kormchaja "  were  distributed  for  use  amongst  the 

1  Translated  into  English  by  W.  J.  Birkbeck,  Esq.,  F.  S.  A.  *  Steering-Book.    W.  J.  B. 

'Accordingly  some  bibliographers  correctly  reckon  this  as  two  editions,  of  which  that  of  1653  in  folio  consists  of  37+1+60+1 
+  16  +  6T9  pages,  and  was  reprinted  by  the  "  Old  Ritualists  "  (Kascolniki*),  in  1785  at  Warsaw. 

*  Rascolniki,  lit.  Schismatics ;  i.e.,  the  Russian  Dissenting  sects  which  in  the  17th  century  left  the  Church  rather  than  accept 
the  service-books  as  corrected  by  the  Patriarch  Nicon.— W.  J.  B. 


xxvi  APPENDED   NOTE   ON  SYNODICAL  LITEEATUEE 

churches,  and  came  into  general  circulation  not  earlier  than  the  year  1653.  The  second 
edition  of  the  "  Kormchaja  "  appeared  in  1787,  after  a  revision  under  the  Metropolitan 
Gabriel  of  Novgorod  and  St.  Petersburgh,1  and  was  followed  by  others  (e.g.,  those  of 
1804,  1816,  and  1823)  without  any  alterations  of  importance.  The  latest  editions  differ 
from  that  of  Nicon  in  certain  particulars,  but  these  particulars  do  not  concern  the  ec- 
clesiastical Canons,  which  are  placed  in  the  first  part  of  the  "Kormchaja"  and  include 
the  85  Apostolic  Canons,  the  decrees  of  the  sixteen  councils  (of  Nicaea,  Ancyra,  Neo- 
csesarea,  Gangra,  Antioch,  Laodicea,  the  2d,  3d,  and  Jfth  Ecumenical,  Sardica,  Carthage, 
Constantinople  under  Nectarius,  in  Trullo,  A.D.  69%,  the  7th  Ecumenical,  the  First- 
and-Second  [council  of  Constantinople]  and  that  in  the  church  of  St.  Sophia)  and  the 
Canons  of  the  13  Holy  Fathers. 

2.  In  the  printed  "  Kormchaja  "  the  canons  are  set  forth,  not  in  their  full  text,  but 
in  a  shortened  form  which  sometimes  gives  but  a  very  insufficient  representation  of  the 
contents  of  the  original.  On  this  account  attempts  at  full  translations  were  made  many 
years  back,  but  these  never  appeared  in  print.  It  was  not  until  1839  that  such  an 
edition  as  this  was  put  forth  by  the  Holy  Synod  at  St.  Petersburgh,  under  the  title : 
"  The  Book  of  the  Canons  of  the  Holy  Apostles,  of  the  Holy  Ecumenical  and  local 
Councils,  and  of  the  Holy  Fathers,"  printed  in  large  folio  in  "  the  Imperial  city  of  St. 
Peter,  the  first  impression  in  the  7347th  year  from  the  creation  of  the  world,  and  the 
1839th  from  the  Birth  in  the  flesh  of  God  the  Word,  indict.  12."  In  this  edition  there 
are  4  unnumbered  leaves  and  455  numbered  pages.  On  each  page  there  are  two  col- 
umns, for  the  original  text  and  the  new  translation  of  the  whole  text  into  the  Slavonic 
respectively,  but  without  the  commentaries  of  the  Byzantine  Canonists ;  occasionally, 
but  rarely,  notes  based  upon  Zonaras  or  Balsamon  are  given,  which  are  not  always  his- 
torically accurate  (for  instance,  that  to  the  10th  Canon  of  Ancyra,  the  3d  of  Sardica  the 
4th  of  Carthage,  and  the  one  which  deals  with  the  First-and-Second  Council  of  a.d.  861) 
while  in  some  places  the  text  itself  is  not  correct  (for  instance,  in  the  13th  Canon  of  the 
1st  Ecumenical  Council).  This  "  Book  of  the  Canons"  subsequently  went  through  the 
following  editions  :  the  2d,  printed  in  Moscow  at  the  Synodal  Press  in  1862,  in  folio 
8  leaves  +  672  +  74  numbered  pages,  with  Greek  and  Slavonic  texts ;  the  3d  ibid  in 
1866,  in  quarto,  3  leaves  +  373  pages  +  1  leaf  +  59  pages,  with  the  Slavonic  text  only  ; 
the  4th,  ibid  in  1874,  in  octavo,  4  leaves  +  455  pages  +  2  leaves  +  104  +  4  pages,  also 
Avith  the  Slavonic  text  only  ;  the  5th,  ibid,  in  1886,  in  folio,  3  leaves  +  395  +  42  pages 
+  1  leaf,  again  with  Slavonic  text  only. 

3.  The  "  Book  of  Canons  "  by  no  means  represents  an  authorized  textus  receptus,  and 
after  its  publication,  the  Holy  Synod  itself  not  unfrequently  introduced  the  Canons  as 
given  in  the  Slavonic  edition  of  the  "  Kormchaja  Kniga  "  into  its  edicts,  and  moreover 
recommended  the  Athenian  Edition  of  the  "  Syntagma  "  for  all  the  ecclesiastico-educa- 
tional  establishments.  This  opened  the  way  for  a  new  work,  which,  with  the  permis- 
sion of  the  supreme  ecclesiastical  authority,  was  undertaken  by  the  Moscow  "  Society 
of  Amateurs  of  Spiritual  Enlightenment."  The  announcement  of  this  was  made  in  No.  3 
•of  the  "  Moscow  Diocesan  Church  Gazette  "  of  the  year  1875,  whilst  in  the  same  year 
in  the  January  number  of  the  Moscow  Journal,  "  Lectures  delivered  in  the  Society  of 
Amateurs  of  Spiritual  Enlightenment,"  the  "  programme  "  of  the  edition  itself  was  printed 
(pages  79-90  in  the  section  devoted  to  bibliography).  In  criticism  of  it  the  Professor 
of  Canonical  Law  in  the  University  of  Novorossiisk,  Alexis  Stepanovich  Pavloff  (who 
died  on  August  16,  1898,  as  Professor  of  the  University  of  Moscow)  wrote  "  Notes  on 
the  programme  of  an  edition,  in  a  Russian  translation  of  the  Canons  of  the  Church  with 
Commentaries  "  in  the  sixteenth  volume  of  "  Memoirs  of  the  Imperial  University  of 
Novorossiisk  "  (Odessa,  1875),  pages  1-17  of  the  Appendix  (and  in  a  separate  pamphlet), 
which  was  afterwards  reprinted  with  certain  additions  in  the  Moscow  Journal,  "  Ortho- 
dox Review,"  of  April,  1876  (pages  730-746),  under  the  title  :  "  A  new  translation  of  the 
Commentaries  upon  the  canons  of  the  church."     To  these  criticisms  the  Professor  of 

1  This  edition  was  published  at  Moscow  in  folio  in  two  parts  and  volumes,  in  the  1st  there  are  2  unnumbered  +  38  +  5  —  60  + 
300  +  39  numbered  pages  ;  in  the  2d  1  +  2  +  235  +  16  +  37  pages. 


APPENDED  NOTE  ON  SYNODICAL  LITERATURE  xxvii 

Ecclesiastical  Law  in  the  Moscow  Ecclesiastical  Academy,  Alexander  Tkeodorovich 
Lavroff,  wrote  a  reply  in  "  Lectures  delivered  in  the  Society  of  Amateurs  of  Spiritual 
Enlightenment  "  (for  the  year  1877,  part  2,  pages  158-194),  entitled  "  A  printed  letter  to 
Alexis  Stepanovich  Pavloff."  Thus  the  plan  of  the  edition  gradually  took  shape.  It 
was  first  printed  in  the  Appendices  to  the  Journal  "  Lectures  in  the  Society,  etc.,"  and 
subsequently  was  published  separately  in  octavo  in  the  following  parts  (A)  I.  "  The 
Canons  of  the  Holy  Apostles  with  Commentaries  "  in  two  editions — Moscow,  1876, 
(from  "  Lectures,"  1875,  pages  1-163)  4  +  12  +  175  pages,  and  ibid.,  1887,  5-12  +  163 
pages;  II.  "Canons  of  the  Holy  Ecumenical  Councils  with  Commentaries "  (from 
"  Lectures  "  1875,  pages  165-325  ;  1876,  pages  329-680 ;  1877,  pages  8^1-900),  in  two 
parts  :  1st  "  The  Canons  of  the  Councils  I.-IV.,"  Moscow,  1877,  260  pages  ;  2d.  "  The 
Canons  of  Councils  V.-VIL,"  ibid.,  736  pages ;  (B)  "  The  Canons  of  the  Holy  Local 
Councils  with  Commentaries,"  also  in  two  parts  (from  "  Lectures "  1877,  pages  900- 
1066  ;  1878,  pages  1067-1306 ;  1879,  pages  1307-1410) :  the  1st  (The  Canons  of  the 
Councils  of  Ancyra,  Neocsesarea,  Gangra,  Antioch,  Laodicea,  and  Sardica)  Moscow, 
1880,  359  pages ;  the  2d  (The  Canons  of  the  Councils  of  Carthage  [with  the  letters  to 
Pope  Boniface  and  to  Pope  Celestine],  Constantinople,  the  First-and-Second,  and  that 
in  the  Temple  of  the  Wisdom  of  the  Word  of  God)  ibid.,  1881,  876  pages;  (C)  "The 
Canons  of  the  Holy  Fathers  with  Commentaries,"  ibid.,  1884,  626  pages.  Together 
with  these  is  a  separate  "  Index  of  subjects  contained  in  the  edition  of  the  Canons  of 
the  Apostles,  Councils  and  Holy  Fathers  with  Commentaries,"  Moscow,  1888,  58  pages 
in  octavo.  The  Greek  text  of  the  canons  follows  the  edition  Swrayfia  tcov  &eia>v  /ecu  iepwv 
Kdvovcov  .  .  .  vtto  T.  A.  PdWrj  ical  M.  JJoTkr],  AS^vrjaiv  1852-1854,  and  alongside 
of  it  is  placed  a  literal  Slavonic  translation,  after  which  follows  a  Russian  translation  of 
the  Commentaries  of  the  Byzantine  Canonists  (Zonaras,  Aristenus,  Balsamon),  and  the 
text  and  commentaries  of  the  Slavonic  "  Kormchaja ;  "  all  this  is  accompanied  by  in- 
troductions and  explanations  of  all  sorts  (historical,  philological,  etc.).  This  edition  is 
rightly  considered  by  specialists  to  be  of  very  great  value  from  a  scientific  point  of 
view.  Professor  A.  Th.  Lavroff  (who  became  a  monk  under  the  name  Alexis,  and  died 
Archbishop  of  Lithuania  and  Vilna)  was  its  chief  editor  and  had  most  to  do  with  it, 
but  many  others  took  part  in  the  work,  and  amongst  these  Professor  A.  S.  Pavloff. 

4.  The  only  Russian  translation  of  the  canons  which  exists  is  contained  in  the  pub- 
lications of  the  Ecclesiastical  Academy  of  Kazan  :  (a)  "  The  Acts  of  the  Ecumenical 
Councils  translated  into  Russian,"  7  volumes.  Kazan,  1859-1878  (some  of  these 
volumes  have  run  into  a  second  edition)  and  (b)  "  Acts  of  the  nine  local  councils  trans- 
lated into  Russian,"  1  volume,  Kazan,  1878.  This  translation  was  made  under  the 
direction  of  the  Holy  Synod,  and  the  Canons  are  reproduced  in  it  according  to  the  text 
of  the  Acts  of  the  Councils. 

From  the  outline  here  presented  of  the  printed  editions  of  the  Canons  of  the  Coun- 
cils, it  will  be  seen  that,  within  the  limits  of  their  practical  applicability,  they  are  rev- 
erenced as  the  source  of  the  operative  law  in  the  Russian  orthodox  church,  and  therefore 
for  her  it  is  only  the  authoritative  Byzantine  commentaries  which  have  any  particular 
importance.  There  are  works  upon  these  by  V.  Demidoff^  "  The  character  and  sig- 
nificance of  the  commentaries  upon  the  Canonical  Codex  of  the  Greek  Church — of 
Aristenus,  Zonaras,  and  Balsamon,"  in  the  "  Orthodox  Review,"  vol.  ii.  of  1888,  and 
of  Professor  V.  A.  Narbekojf,  of  Kazan,  "The  commentaries  of  Balsamon  upon  tne 
Nomocanon  of  Photius,"  Kazan,  1889,  and  of  Professor  31.  E.  Krasnozlien,  of  Jurieff 
(Dorpat)  "  The  Commentators  of  the  Canonical  Codex  of  the  Eastern  Church :  Aris- 
tenus, Zonaras,  and  Balsamon."     Moscow,  1892. 

No  separate  scientific  commentaries  upon  all  the  canons  of  the  councils  exist  in 
Russian  literature,  but  they  are  described,  and  explained  in  courses  of  Ecclesiastical 
law  (of  the  Archimandrite  John  [who,  when  he  died,  was  Bishop  of  Smolensk] 
of  Professors  N.  S.  Suvoroff,  T.  S.  Berdnikoff.  N.  A.  Lashkareff,  M.  A.  Ostroiimoff) 


xxviii  APPENDED   NOTE   ON   SYNODIOAL  LITERATURE 


in  our  works  upon  the  history  of  the  Ecumenical  Councils  (by  Bishop  John,  and 
Professor  Alexis  Petrovich  Lebedeff),  and  in  monographs  dealing  with  Canon  Law  and 
Church  History.  As  far  as  a  critical  edition  of  the  original  text  of  the  canons  is  con- 
cerned, there  is  a  learned  and  useful  article  (upon  a  book  by  Fr.  Lauchert,  Die  Kanones 
usw.,  Freiberg  i.  Br.  und  Leipsig,  1896),  by  Vasili  Vasilievich  Bolotoff,  Professor  of 
Ecclesiastical  History  in  the  St.  Petersburgh  Ecclesiastical  Academy  in  the  "  Christian 
Beading,"  vol.  iv.  for  1896,  pp.  178-195. 


EXCURSUS    ON  THE    HISTORY   OF  THE    ROMAN    LAW   AND 
ITS   RELATION  TO  THE   CANON  LAW. 

The  foregoing  bibliographical  outline  would  be  entirely  incomplete  did  I  not  give 
the  reader  at  least  a  sketch  of  how  those  canons  adopted  by  the  various  councils  gradu- 
ally won  admission  to  the  law-code  of  the  Empire,  and  how  that  code  itself  came  into 
being.  For  those  wishing  to  study  the  matter  in  detail  I  would  name  as  the  most  recent 
authorities  upon  the  Roman  Law,  Mr.  Muirhead,  who  has  published  with  additions  and 
notes  his  article  on  the  subject  in  the  "  Encyclopaedia  Britannica,"  and  Mr.  Bury's  new 
edition  of  Gibbon's  Rome  just  being  issued  with  most  learned  notes. 

But  neither  of  these  writers  has  put  the  matter  exactly  as  I  desire  for  this  purpose, 
and  I  have  therefore  been  forced  to  seek  elsewhere  the  information  I  now  lay  before 
the  reader. 

The  study  of  Jurisprudence  did  not  form  a  separate  department  among  the  ancient 
Greeks,  but  among  the  Romans  it  was  quite  otherwise,  and  a  very  elaborate  system 
was  developed,  so  elaborate  as  to  demand  the  care  of  a  special  class  of  men,  who  de- 
voted themselves  to  this  business  alone  and  handed  down  to  their  successors  a  con- 
stantly increasing  mass  of  legal  matter. 

"When  Greece  fell  under  the  Bom  an  yoke  the  laws  of  the  victor  were  imposed  upon 
the  vanquished,  but  even  then  the  Greeks  did  not  take  to  legal  studies.  In  fact  not  un- 
til the  seat  of  the  Empire  was  removed  to  Constantinople  did  the  East  become  a  centre 
of  jurisprudence  or  the  residence  of  the  chief  legal  experts.  In  the  whole  period  before 
the  fourth  century  of  our  era  we  know  of  but  one  barrister  who  wrote  in  Greek,  and  he 
came  from  the  West,  Herennius  Modestinus.  He  was  a  disciple  of  Ulpian  and  precep- 
tor to  the  Emperor  Maximian  the  Younger. 

From  the  time  of  Hadrian  to  that  of  Alexander  Severus  the  influence  of  the  legal 
schools  of  Borne  had  been  paramount.  The  Emperors  consulted  them  and  asked  them 
to  decide  difficult  points.  But  after  the  death  of  Alexander  this  custom  fell  into  entire 
disuse,  and  the  Emperors  themselves  decided  the  matters  formerly  entrusted  to  the 
lawyers.  After  this  time  the  Imperial  Constitutions  became  the  chief  sources  of  Bo- 
man  law.  It  is  only  in  the  time  of  Constantine  the  Great  that  we  find  once  again  the 
lawyers  rising  into  prominence  and  a  flourishing  school  at  Beyroot  in  Syria.  It  was 
at  this  time  that  the  Imperial  Constitutions  or  Edicts  were  first  collected,  for  until  then 
they  existed  only  in  detached  documents.  This  collection  was  made  by  two  lawyers, 
Gregory  or  Gregorian,  and  Hermogenes.  Gregory's  collection  contains  the  laws  set 
forth  from  the  time  of  Hadrian  to  Constantine,  and  Hermogenes  wrote  a  supplement. 
Although  this  was  but  a  private  enterprise,  yet  it  was  cited  in  the  courts  of  law,  just  as 
Lord  Lyndwood's  Provinciate  is  with  us  to-day. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  it  was  about  this  same  time  that  the  first  attempt  was 
made  to  collect  the  ecclesiastical  canons,  and  so  the  Civil  Law  and  the  Canon  Law  (as 
we  know  them  in  after  times)  had  their  rise  about  the  same  period. 

The  law  of  the  Empire  was  not,  however,  to  be  left  to  private  and  unofficial  action, 
but  by  the  care  of  Theodosius  the  Younger  its  first  official  collection  was  made.  This 
prince  directed  eight  men  learned  in  the  law  to  gather  into  one  body  of  laws  all  the  Im- 
perial Constitutions  published  since  the  last  included  in  the  collections  of  Gregory  and 
Hermogenes.  This  is  the  "  Theodosian  Code,"  and  contains  the  laws  set  forth  by  Con- 
stantine and  his  successors.  It  was  promulgated  in  438  in  the  East,  and  received  by 
the  then  Emperor  of  the  West,  Yalentinian  III.  To  this  were  subsequently  added  such 
laws  as  each  set  forth,  under  the  title  of  "  New  Constitutions." 

The  Emperor  Justinian  determined  still  further  to  simplify  the  attaining  of  judicial 
decisions.  It  is  true  that  the  making  of  the  legal  collections  referred  to  had  added 
greatly  to  the  ease  of  determining  the  law  in  any  given  case,  but  there  was  a  source  of 
great  confusion  in  the  endless  number  of  legal  decisions  which  by  custom  had  acquired 


xxx  EXCURSUS    ON   THE   HISTORY   OF   THE   ROMAN   LAW 


the  force  of  law,  and  which  were  by  no  means  always  consistent  between  themselves; 
these  were  the  famous  response/,  jurisperitorum.  To  clear  up  this  difficulty  was  no  small 
task,  but  the  Emperor  went  about  it  in  the  most  determined  fashion  and  appointed  a 
commission,  consisting  of  Tribonian  and  ten  other  experts,  to  make  a  new  collection  of 
all  the  imperial  constitutions  from  Hadrian  to  his  own  day.  This  is  the  famous  Jus- 
tinian Code,  which  was  promulgated  in  529,  and  abrogated  all  previous  collections.1 

This,  however,  was  not  sufficient  to  remove  the  difficulty,  and  Tribonian  next,  together 
with  sixteen  lawyers,  spent  three  years  in  making  extracts  from  the  great  mass  of  deci- 
sions of  the  ancient  jurists,  filling  as  they  did  nearly  two  thousand  volumes.  These 
they  digested  and  did  their  best  to  clear  away  the  contradictions.  When  the  work  was 
finished  it  appeared  to  the  world  as  the  "  Pandects,"  because  it  was  intended  to  contain 
all  there  was  to  be  said  upon  the  subject.  It  is  also  known  as  the  "  Digest."  This 
work  was  set  forth  in  533  and  from  that  time  such  of  the  former  decisions  as  were  not 
incorporated  ceased  to  have  any  force. 

It  must  however  be  remembered  that,  while  this  was  the  case,  all  the  decisions  con- 
tained in  the  Pandects  did  not  obtain  the  force  of  law.  The  Pandects  are  not  a  code  of 
laws,  but  a  system  of  public  jurisprudence  composed  by  public  authority.  To  the  Pan- 
dects were  added  by  the  Emperor  two  ordinances,  the  first  to  forbid  any  copyist  to 
write  them  in  an  abbreviated  form  ;  and  the  second  forbidding  commentators  to  treat 
them  in  anything  but  their  literal  sense. 

While  this  work  was  in  progress  some  points  Avere  so  complicated  and  obscure  that 
the  Emperor  had  to  be  appealed  to,  and  his  writings  in  these  particulars  are  the  origin 
of  the  "  Fifty  Decisions." 

At  the  same  time  was  prepared  the  "  Institutes,"  containing  the  elements  of  the 
whole  Eoman  law.2 

Later,  new  laws  having  been  made,  the  Code  had  to  be  revised ;  the  former  edition 
was  abrogated  in  534,  and  a  new  one  set  forth  with  the  title  "  Codex  repetitae  praelec- 
tionis." 

The  last  of  Justinian's  labours  in  the  field  of  jurisprudence  (if  indeed  they  were  not 
collected  after  his  death)  are  his  "  Novels,"  a  series  of  imperial  constitutions  issued  be- 
tween 535  and  559  (Neapal  AiaTa^w^.  There  are  one  hundred  and  sixty-eight  of  these 
Novels,  but  the  ancient  glosses  only  know  ninety-seven,  and  the  rest  have  been  added 
since,  as  they  have  been  found. 

Such  is  the  origin  of  the  Corpus  Juris  Civilis,  and  its  history  needed  to  be  set  forth 
in  this  place  on  account  of  its  close  connection  with  the  Corpus  Juris  Canonici.  In  the 
foregoing  I  have  followed  M.  Schoell  in  his  admirable  Histoire  de  la  Litterature  Orecque 
Profane,  to  which  I  am  also  chiefly  indebted  for  the  following  notes  upon  the  jurists  of 
the  sixth  and  ensuing  centuries. 

A  work  which  is  often  looked  upon  as  the  origin  of  the  Canon  Law  was  composed  by 
a  lawyer  of  Antioch,  somewhere  near  the  middle  of  the  sixth  century.  This  jurist  was 
John  of  Antioch,  surnamed  Scholasticus.  He  was  representative  or  apocrisiarius  of 
the  Church  of  Antioch  at  Constantinople,  and  afterward  was  made  Patriarch  of  that  see, 
over  Avhich  he  ruled  from  564  until  his  death  in  578.  While  still  a  simple  priest  at 
Antioch  he  made  his  Collection  of  the  Canons  of  the  Councils. 

"  He  was  not  the  first  who  conceived  the  idea  of  such  a  work.  Some  writers,  resting 
upon  a  passage  in  Socrates,  have  been  of  opinion  that  this  honour  belonged  to  Sabinus, 
bishop  of  Heraclea,  in  Thrace,  at  the  beginning  of  the  fifth  century ;  but  Socrates  is  not 
speaking  of  a  collection  of  canons  at  all,  but  of  the  synodal  acts,  of  the  letters  written 
by  or  addressed  to  the  synods.  If,  however,  Sabinus  did  not  make  a  collection  of 
canons,  it  is  certain  nevertheless  that  before  John  of  Antioch  there  existed  one,  for  he 
himself  cites  it  many  times,  although  he  does  not  name  the  authors." 3 

1  It  was  written  in  Latin  but,  says  Bury  (Appendix  to  Vol.  V.  of  Gibbon's  Rome,  p.  525),  "  was  also  immediately  after  its  pub- 
lication in  Latin,  issued  (perhaps  incompletely)  in  a  Greek  form  (Gf .  Zacharia  Von  Lingenthal,  Gr.  Rom.  Recht.,  p.  6).  Most  of  the 
later  Novels  are  Greek,  and  Novel  vij.  [15,  ed.  Zach.]  expressly  recognizes  the  necessity  of  using  '  the  common  Greek  tongue.'  " 

2  The  Pandects  or  Bigest  was  translated  into  Greek  by  Borotheus,  and  Theophilus  prepared  a  Greek  paraphrase  of  the  Institutes. 
3 Schoell,  Hist.  Litt.  Grec,  Tome  vii.,  Lib.  vi.,  chap,  xcvij.,  p.  226. 


EXCURSUS   ON   THE   HISTORY   OF   THE   ROMAN   LAW  xxxi 

"  In  gathering  together  thus  the  canons  of  the  councils  John  of  Antioch  did  not 
form  a  complete  body  of  ecclesiastical  law.  By  his  Novel  CXLL,  Justinian  had  indeed 
given  to  the  canons  of  the  Church  the  force  of  law,  but  he  himself  published  a  great 
number  of  constitutions  upon  Church  matters.  Now  it  was  necessary  to  harmonize 
these  constitutions  and  canons,  and  to  accomplish  this  feat  was  the  object  of  a  second 
work  undertaken  by  John  of  Antioch,  to  which  he  gave  the  title  of  Nomocanon 
(Nofio/cdvav),1  a  word  which  from  that  time  has  served  to  designate  any  collection  of 
this  sort."  2 

Bury  says,  "  In  the  troubles  of  the  Vllth  century  the  study  of  law,  like  many  other 
things,  declined,  and  in  the  practical  administration  of  justice  the  prescriptions  of  the 
Code  and  Digest  were  often  ignored  or  modified  by  the  alien  precepts  of  Christianity. 
The  religion  of  the  Empire  had  exerted  but  very  slight  influence — no  fundamental  influ- 
ence, we  may  say — on  the  Justinian  law.  Leo  III.,  the  founder  of  the  Syrian  (vulgarly 
called  Isaurian)  dynasty,  when  he  restored  the  Empire  after  a  generation  of  anarchy, 
saw  the  necessity  of  legislation  to  meet  the  changed  circumstances  of  the  time.  The 
settlements  of  foreigners — Slavs  and  Mardaites — in  the  provinces  of  the  Empire  created 
an  agrarian  question,  which  he  dealt  with  in  his  Agrarian  Code.  The  increase  of  Slav- 
onic and  Saracenic  piracy  demanded  increased  securities  for  maritime  trade,  and  this 
was  dealt  with  in  a  Navigation  Code.  But  it  was  not  only  for  special  relations  that  Leo 
made  laws  ;  he  legislated  also,  and  in  an  entirely  new  way,  for  the  general  relations  of 
life.  He  issued  a  law  book  (in  a.d.  740  in  the  name  of  himself  and  his  son  Constantine), 
which  changed  and  modified  the  Roman  law,  as  it  had  been  fixed  by  Justinian.  The 
Ecloga,3  as  it  is  called,  may  be  described  as  a  Christian  law  book.  It  is  a  deliberate 
attempt  to  change  the  legal  system  of  the  Empire  by  an  application  of  Christian  princi- 
ples. Examples,  to  illustrate  its  tendency,  will  be  given  below.  The  horror  in  which 
the  iconoclasts  were  held  on  account  of  their  heresy  by  the  image-worshippers,  cast  dis- 
credit upon  all  their  works.  This  feeling  had  something  to  do  with  the  great  reaction, 
which  was  inaugurated  by  Basil  I.,  against  their  legal  reforms.  The  Christian  Code  of 
Leo  prevailed  in  the  empire  for  less  than  a  century  and  a  half ;  and  then,  under  the 
auspices  of  Basil,  the  Roman  law  of  Justinian  was  (partially)  restored.  In  legal  activity 
the  Basilian  epoch  faintly  reflected  the  epoch  of  Justinian  itself.  A  handbook  of  ex- 
tracts from  the  Institutes,  Digest,  Code,  and  Novels,  was  published  in  a.d.  879,  entitled 
the  Prochiron,  to  diffuse  a  knowledge  of  the  forgotten  system.  But  the  great  achieve- 
ment of  the  Basilian  epoch  is  the  'Basilica' — begun  under  Basil,  completed  under  Leo 
VI. — a  huge  collection  of  all  the  laws  of  the  Empire,  not  only  those  still  valid,  but 
those  which  had  become  obsolete.  It  seems  that  two  commissions  of  experts  were  ap- 
pointed to  prepare  the  material  for  this  work.  One  of  these  commissions  compiled  the 
Prochiron  by  the  way,  and  planned  out  the  Basilica  in  sixty  Books.  The  other  com- 
mission also  prepared  a  handbook  called  the  Epanagoge,  which  was  never  actually  pub- 
lished (though  a  sketch  of  the  work  is  extant),  and.  planned  out  the  Basilica  in  forty 
Books.  The  Basilica,  as  actually  published,  are  arranged  in  sixty  Books,  compiled  from 
the  materials  prepared  by  both  commissions. 

"  The  Basilian  revival  of  Justinianean  law  was  permanent ;  and  it  is  outside  our  pur- 
pose to  follow  the  history  further,  except  to  note  the  importance  of  the  foundation  of  a 
school  of  law  at  Constantinople  in  the  11th  century  by  the  Emperor  Constantine  IX. 
The  law  enacting  the  institution  of  this  school,  under  the  direction  of  a  salaried  Nomo- 
phylax,  is  extant.  John  Xiphilin  (see  above)  was  the  first  director.  This  foundation 
may  have  possibly  had  some  influence  on  the  institution  of  the  school  at  Bologna  half 
a  century  later."  4 

I  take  from  Schcell  the  following  description  of  the  "  Basilica  "  : 

"The  'Basilica'  are  a  body  of  Roman  law  in  the  Greek  language,  extracted  from  the 
Institutes,  the  Pandects,  the  Codes  and  the  Novels  of  Justinian  as  well  as  from  the  Im- 

1  The  two  collections  of  John  are  published  with  a  translation  in  the  Bibliotheca  Juris  Canonici  Veteris  of  Voellus  and  Justellus, 
Vol.  n.  2  Ibid  ut  supra,  p.  227. 

3  The  "  Ecloga  "  were  edited  in  1852  by  Zacharia,  and  again  in  1889  by  Monferratue. 

♦  Appendix  to  Vol.  V.  of  Gibbon's  Decline  and  Fall  of  the  Roman  Empire,  pp.  525  and  526. 


xxxii  EXCUKSUS  ON  THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMAN  LAW 

perial  Constitutions  posterior  to  that  prince ;  also  extracts  from  the  interpretations  of 
such  jurists  as  had  won  a  fixed  authority  in  the  courts,  and  the  canons  of  the  councils. 
Here  is  found  together  the  civil  and  the  ecclesiastical  law  of  the  Greeks,  these  two  laws 
having  been  in  an  intimate  union  by  reason  of  the  authority  which  the  Emperors  exer- 
cised over  the  Church ;  on  the  other  hand,  in  the  West  there  was  formed  step  by  step  a 
canon  law  separate  from  the  civil  law,  and  having  a  different  source."  J 

Such,  then,  were  the  "  Basilica,"  but  what  is  most  singular  is  that  this  collection 
was  not  given  the  force  of  law,  neither  by  Leo  VI.  nor  by  Constantine  VI.,  although  it 
was  prepared  at  their  order,  under  their  authority,  and  was  written  in  the  language 
which  was  spoken  by  their  subjects.  The  Justinian  code  of  law,  although  in  Latin, 
still  continued  to  be  the  only  authority  in  the  entire  East.  An  anonymous  writer  pre- 
pared an  Epitome  of  the  Basilica,  digested  into  Alphabetical  order,  and  beginning  with 
"  Of  the  Orthodox  faith  of  Christians." 

In  883  Photius  published  a  "  Syntagma  canonum  "  and  a  "  Nomocanon  "  with  the 
title  TIpoKavibv,  because  it  was  placed  before  the  canons.  This  last  work  at  the  com- 
mand of  Constantine  VI.  Avas  revised  and  soon  took  the  place  of  the  Nomocanon  of 
John  of  Antioch,  over  which  work  it  had  the  advantage  of  being  more  recent  and  of 
being  digested  in  better  order.  In  citing  the  canons,  only  the  titles  are  given ;  but  the 
text  of  the  civil  laws  appears  in  full.  "  As  in  the  Eastern  Church  the  influence  of  the 
imperial  authority  increased  at  the  expense  of  that  of  the  councils,  and  as  these  princes 
made  ecclesiastical  affairs  a  principal  part  of  their  government,  it  came  to  pass  that  the 
Nomocanon  of  Photius  became  of  more  frequent  and  more  necessary  use  than  his  Syn- 
tagma, [which  contained  the  actual  text  of  the  canons  of  the  councils  down  to  880]. 
Many  commentators  busied  themselves  with  it,  while  the  collection  of  the  councils  was 
neglected.  Thus  it  has  happened  that  the  Nomocanon  has  become  the  true  foundation 
of  the  ecclesiastical  law  of  the  East."  2 

But  while  this  is  true,  yet  there  were  not  lacking  commentators  upon  the  Canon  law, 
and  of  the  three  chiefest  of  these  some  notice  must  be  taken  in  this  place.  As  I  have 
already  pointed  out  it  is  to  Bishop  Beveridge  that  we  owe  the  publication  not  only  of 
Photius's  Collection  of  Canons  which  are  found  in  his  "  SvvoBiko v  sive  Pandectae,"  but 
also  of  the  scholia  of  all  three  of  these  great  commentators,  Zonaras,  Aristenus,  and 
Balsamon,  and  from  his  most  learned  Prolegomena  to  the  same  work  I  have  chiefly 
drawn  the  following  facts,  referring  the  curious  reader  to  the  introduction 3  itself  for 
further  particulars. 

John  Zonaras  was  probably  the  same  person  who  wrote  the  Byzantine  History 
which  bears  his  name.  He  flourished  under  Alexis  Comnenus,  and  enjoyed  the  high 
office  of  Grand  Drungarius  Viglae  {Apovyyapios  t»}?  jB/y?u??)  and  Chief  of  the  Clerks. 
After  some  years  of  secular  life  he  retired  to  a  monastery  and  devoted  himself  to  literary 
pursuits.  While  here,  at  the  command  of  his  superiors,  and  moved  by  the  persuasion 
of  his  friends,  he  wrote  that  great  book  which  has  made  his  fame,  which  he  entitled 
"  An  Exposition  of  the  Sacred  and  Divine  Canons,  as  well  those  of  the  holy  and  ven- 
erable Apostles,  as  also  those  of  the  sacred  CEcumenical  Synods,  and  those  of  the  local 
or  particular  councils,  and  those  of  the  rest  of  the  Holy  Fathers  ;  by  the  labour  of  John 
Zonaras  the  monk,  who  was  formerly  Grand  Drungarius  Viglae  and  Chief  of  the  Clerks."4 

One  of  the  greatest  peculiarities  of  this  work,  and  one  which  distinguishes  it  very 
markedly  from  the  later  work  of  Balsamon  upon  the  same  subject,  is  that  Zonaras  con- 
fines himself  strictly  to  the  canon  law  and  rarely  makes  any  references  to  the  civil  law 
whatever ;  and  in  such  canons  as  bear  no  relation  to  the  civil  law  Balsamon  often 
adopts  Zonaras's  notes  without  change  or  addition. 

These  commentaries  were  first  brought  to  light  by  John  Quintin,  a  professor  of 
canon  law  at  Paris,  who  published  a  Latin  translation  of  the  scholia  upon  the  Apostolic 

1  Schoell,  ut  supra,  p.  229.    The  best  edition  of  the  Basilica  is  by  W.  E.  Heimbach  in  6  vols.  (1833-70). 
5  Schoell,  ut  ante,  p.  238. 

3  Beveridge,  'S.vvohtKbv  sive  Pandectoe,  Tom.  I.  of  the  original  ed.  Reprinted  in  Lib.  Anglo.  Cath.  Theol.,  appendix  to  Vol.  XII. 
of  Beveridge's  Works,  pp.  xxi.-xxxix. 

*  'EfifyTjtris  tux/  Upon*  Ka\  Oeitav  kolvovuhi  Ttav  T€  oyi'w^  teal  trenTiov  ' A.nocrTa.^(tiv,  k.  t.  A. 


EXCURSUS   ON  THE  HISTORY   OF  THE  ROMAN  LAW  xxxiii 


Canons.  This  was  in  1558.  In  1618  Antonius  Salmatia  edited  his  commentaries  on 
the  canons  of  the  Councils  done  into  Latin.  To  this  Latin  version  the  Paris  press 
added  the  Greek  text  from  the  MS.  codex  in  the  Koyal  Library  and  printed  it  in 
1618.  In  1622  the  same  press  issued  his  commentaries  upon  the  Epistles  of  the  Holy 
Fathers,  together  with  those  of  St.  Gregory  Thaumaturgus,  Macarius  of  Egypt,  and 
Basil.  But  Beveridge  collected  them  in  his  Oxford  Edition  for  the  first  time  into  one 
work ;  preparing  a  somewhat  critical  text  by  collation  with  some  manuscripts  he  found 
at  home. 

The  second  of  these  great  Greek  scholiasts  is  Alexis  Aristenus.  As  Beveridge  points 
out,  he  must  have  flourished  before  or  at  the  same  time  as  Balsamon,  for  this  latter 
speaks  of  him  in  high  terms  of  commendation  in  his  scholion  on  the  Sixth  of  the  Apos- 
tolic Canons,  describing  him  as  tov  virkpn^ov.  Aristenus  was  Nomophylax,  Orphano- 
trophe  and  Protecdekas,  or  chief  of  the  Syndics  of  the  Communes,  called  Ecdics 
("EkSikoi).  He  wrote  the  excellent  series  of  notes  upon  the  Epitomes  of  the  Canons 
which  are  given  the  reader  in  Beveridge's  Pradects.  Schcell  says  that  it  is  an  error  to 
attribute  to  him  the  "  Extract  of  the  Ancient  Ecclesiastical  Laws,"  "  which  is  none  of 
his."  l  Aristenus  was  Grand  Economus  of  the  Church  of  Constantinople  and  a  man  of 
great  distinction ;  and  his  opinion  was  sought  after  and  his  decision  followed  even  when 
in  opposition  to  one  of  the  Patriarchs,  viz. :  Nicephorus  of  Jerusalem. 

Beveridge  was  the  first  to  print  Aristenus's  Scholia,  and  he  did  so  from  four  MSS., 
in  England,  for  a  description  of  which  I  refer  the  reader  to  the  bishop's  prolegomena. 

Theodore  Balsamon  is  the  last  of  the  three  great  Greek  scholiasts.  He  flourished 
in  the  time  of  the  Emperor  Isaac  Angelus  and  bore  the  title  of  Patriarch  of  Antioch, 
although  at  that  time  the  city  was  in  the  hands  of  the  Latins  and  had  been  so  since 
1100.  He  was  looked  upon  as  the  greatest  jurist  of  his  times  both  in  ecclesiastical  and 
civil  matters.  Somewhere  about  the  year  1150,  he  wrote  by  the  order  of  Manuel  Coni- 
nenus  a  series  of  "  Scholia  upon  the  Nomocanon  of  Photius,"  and  another  set  styled 
"  Scholia  upon  the  Canons  of  the  Apostles,  of  the  Councils  and  of  the  Fathers  of  the 
Church;  "  he  also  prepared  a  "Collection  of  [imperial]  Constitutions  upon  ecclesiasti- 
cal matters," 3  in  three  books,  which  has  been  published  (by  Lcewenklaw)  at  Frankfort, 
1595,  under  the  title  "  Paratitles."  There  remains  also  a  great  number  of  his  opinions 
on  cases  presented  to  him,  notably  his  "  answers  to  sixty-four  canonical  questions  by 
Mark,  Patriarch  of  Alexandria." 

These  most  learned  writings  were  unknown  and  forgotten,  at  least  in  the  West, 
until  they  were  set  forth  in  a  Latin  translation  during  the  time  the  Council  of  Trent 
was  sitting,  in  1561,  and  not  till  1620  did  the  Greek  text  appear  in  the  Paris  edition  of 
that  date.  But  this  text  was  imperfect  and  corrupt,  and  Beveridge  produced  a  pure 
text  from  an  Oxford  MS.,  with  which  he  compared  several  others.  Moreover  in  his 
Pandects  he  amended  the  Latin  text  as  well  in  numberless  particulars.  For  further 
particulars  of  the  bibliography  of  the  matter  see  Beveridge.4 

It  may  not  be  amiss  to  add  that  abundant  proof  of  the  high  esteem  in  which  Balsa- 
mon was  held  is  found  in  contemporary  authors,  and  no  words  can  give  an  exaggerated 
idea  of  the  weight  of  his  opinion  on  all  legal  matters,  religious  and  profane ;  his  works 
were  undertaken  at  the  command  of  the  Emperor  and  of  the  Patriarch,  and  were 
received  with  an  unmixed  admiration.5 

In  the  thirteenth  century  a  certain  Chumnus  who  had  been  Nomophylax  and  was 
afterwards  elevated  to  the  Archiepiscopal  chair  of  Thessalonica  wrote  a  little  book  on 
the  "  Degrees  of  Relationship." 6 

In  the  fourteenth  century  we  find  Matthew  Blastares  writing  "  An  Alphabetical 
Table  "7  of  the  contents  of  the  canons  of  the  councils,  and  of  the  laws  of  the  Emperors. 

And  in  the  same  century  we  find  Constantine  Harmenopulus,  who  was  born  in  1320. 
He  was,  when  thirty  years  of  age,  a  member  of  the  first  court  of  civil  justice  (Judex 

i  Schcell,  Hist.  Lib.  Grec,  Tom  VII.,  p.  241.  »  Beveridge,  Pandect®.    Pro!.  §  XXX. 

3  Tun  iKK\-qo-i.a.<TTiKoiv  SidTageuv  2vAAoyij.  4  Beveridge,  Pandects,  Prol.  §  XlX.-XXn. 

6  Ibid.,  Prol.  §  XVL-XIX.  •  Found  in  Leunclavius,  Jur.  Grec.  Rom.,  Vol.  ii. 

7  2,vvTaytia  Kara  2toix«up,  found  in  Beveridge's  Synodicon,  but  (says  SctuslJ)  "in  a  manner  very  little  correct." 

VOL.    XIV.  C 


xxxiv  EXCURSUS   ON  THE  HISTORY  OE  THE  ROMAN  LAW 

Dromi).  Subsequently  lie  was  appointed  Counsellor  of  the  Emperor,  John  Cantacuzene, 
and  finally  Sebastos  and  Curopalatos  under  John  Paleologus.  In  the  year  1345  he 
published  a  "  Manual  of  Jurisprudence."  :  This  work  is  of  great  value  to  the  student  of 
Roman  law  as  he  completes  the  work  of  the  Emperor  Basil  by  adding  the  imperial  con- 
stitutions since  that  time.  But  our  chief  concern  with  him  is  as  the  author  of  an 
"Epitome  of  the  Divine  and  Sacred  Canons."2 

Constantine  Harmenopulus  was  the  last  Greek  jurist,  and  then  Constantinople  fell, 
to  the  everlasting  disgrace  of  a  divided  Christendom,  into  the  hands  of  the  Infidel,  and 
the  law  of  the  false  Prophet  supplanted  the  Roman  Law,  the  Code  of  Civilization  and 
Christianity. 

I  pass  now  to  the  history  of  the  growth  of  the  canon  law  in  the  "West.  No  one  read- 
ing even  cursorily  the  canons  contained  in  the  present  volume  can  fail  to  notice  that, 
with  the  exception  of  those  of  the  African  code,  they  are  primarily  intended  for  the 
government  of  the  East  and  of  persons  more  immediately  under  the  shadow  of  the  im- 
perial city.  In  fact  in  the  canons  of  the  Council  in  Trullo  and  in  those  of  the  Seventh 
S}'nod  there  are  places  which  not  even  covertly  are  attacks,  or  at  least  reflections,  upon 
the  Western  customs  of  the  time.  And  it  does  not  seem  to  be  an  unjust  view  of  the 
matter  to  detect  in  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  and  its  canon  on  the  position  of  the  See 
of  Rome,  a  beginning  of  that  unhappy  spirit  which  found  its  full  expression  in  that  most 
lamentable  breaking  off  of  communion  between  East  and  West. 

While,  then,  as  I  have  pointed  out,  in  the  East  the  Canon  Law  was  developed  and 
digested  side  by  side  and  in  consonance  with  the  civil  law,  in  the  West  the  state  of 
things  was  wholly  different,  and  Avhile  in  secular  matters  the  secular  power  was  sup- 
posed to  be  supreme,  there  grew  up  a  great  body  of  Ecclesiastical  Law,  of  ten  at  variance 
with  the  secular  decrees  upon  the  subject.  To  trace  this,  step  by  step,  is  no  part  of  my 
duty  in  this  excursus,  and  I  shall  only  give  so  brief  an  outline  that  the  reader  may  be 
able  to  understand  the  references  in  the  notes  which  accompany  the  Canons  in  the  text. 

Somewhere  about  the  year  500  Dionysius  Exiguus,  who  was  Abbot  of  a  Monastery 
in  Rome,  translated  a  collection  of  Greek  Canons  into  Latin  for  Bishop  Stephen  of  Sa- 
lona.  At  the  head  of  these  he  placed  fifty  of  what  we  now  know  as  the  "  Canons  of 
the  Apostles,"  but  it  must  not  be  supposed  that  he  was  convinced  of  their  Apostolic 
origin,  for  in  the  Preface  to  his  translation  he  expressly  styles  them  "  Canons  which 
are  said  to  be  by  the  Apostles,"  and  adds  "  quibus  plurimi  consensum  non  prcebuere 
facilem."  3  To  these  he  added  the  canons  of  Chalcedon  with  those  that  council  had  ac- 
cepted, viz.,  those  of  Sardica,  and  a  large  number  passed  by  African  Synods,  and  lastly 
the  Papal  Decretals  from  Siricius  to  Anastasius  II. 

The  next  collection  is  that  of  St.  Isidore  of  Seville,  or  which  is  supposed  to  have 
been  made  by  him,  early  in  the  seventh  century. 

About  the  middle  of  the  ninth  century  there  appeared  a  collection  bearing  the  name 
of  Isidore  Mercator,  and  containing  the  "false  decretals"  which  have  been  so  fruitful  a 
theme  of  controversial  writing.  This  collection  was  made  somewhere  about  the  year 
850,  and  possibly  at  Mayence.  Many  writers  in  treating  of  these  decretals,  which  are 
undoubtedly  spurious,  seem  to  forget  that  they  must  have  expressed  the  prevailing 
opinions  of  the  day  in  which  they  were  forged,  of  what  those  early  Popes  would  have 
been  likely  to  have  said,  and  that  therefore  even  forgeries  as  they  certainly  are,  they 
have  a  great  historical  value  which  no  sound  scholar  can  properly  neglect. 

After  the  collection  of  St.  Isidore  we  have  no  great  collection  till  that  of  Gratian  in 
1151.  Gratian  Was  a  Benedictine  monk,  and  he  styled  his  work  "  A  Reconciling  of 
contradictory  canons  "  (Concordanfia  discordantium  Oanonum),  which  well  sets  forth  what 
his  chief  object  in  view  was,  but  his  work  had  a  great  future  before  it,  and  all  the  world 

1  Tlpoxeipov  tu>v  voixav.  Of  this  there  have  been  many  editions  since  the  first,  which  was  that  of  Paris,  1540,  edited  by  Snallen- 
berg,  without  any  Latin  translation  and  without  notes.  The  first  Latin  version  was  published  at  Cologne  in  1547,  a  second  at  Lyons 
in  155G,  and  a  third  at  Lausanne  in  1580.    At  last  in  1587,  at  Geneva,  there  appeared  an  edition  in  Greek  and  Latin. 

2'E7UTojir|  twi/  BeiCiv  nai  Lep&v  Kavovmv.    This  work  is  found  with  a  Latin  version  in  the  Collection  of  Loewenklaw. 

3  Hefele  points  out  that  Dr  von  Drey's  contention  that  "  plurimi "  refers  to  the  Greeks  cannot  be  sustained  if  it  is  pushed  so  far 
as  to  exclude  from  the  West  an  acquaintance  with  these  canons  in  their  Greek  form,  for,  as  he  well  points  out  Greek  was  a  perfectly 
well  understood  language  at  this  time  in  the  West,  especially  in  Italy,  where  it  was  largely  spoken.  {A  Mist.  Christ.  Councils,  Vol. 
I.    Appendix,  p.  449.) 


EXCURSUS   ON  THE  HISTORY  OF  THE   ROMAN  LAW  xxxv 

knows  it  as  "  Gratian's  Decretum,"  and  with  it  begins  the  "  collections  "  of  Canon  law, 
if  we  consider  it  as  a  system  in  present  force. 

"  This  great  work  is  divided  into  three  parts.  The  first  part,  in  101  '  Distinctions,' 
treats  of  ecclesiastical  law,  its  origin,  principles,  and  authority,  and  then  of  the  different 
ranks  and  duties  of  the  clergy.  The  second  part,  in  thirty-six  '  Causes,'  treats  of  eccle- 
siastical courts  and  their  forms  of  procedure.  The  third  part,  usually  called  '  De  Con- 
secratione,'  treats  of  things  and  rites  employed  in  the  service  of  religion.  From  its 
first  appearance  the  Decretum  obtained  a  wide  popularity,  but  it  was  soon  discovered 
that  it  contained  numerous  errors,  which  were  corrected  under  the  directions  of  suc- 
cessive Popes  down  to  Gregory  XIII.  Nor,  although  every  subsequent  generation  has 
resorted  to  its  pages,  is  the  Decretum  an  authority  to  this  day — that  is,  whatever  canons 
or  maxims  of  law  are  found  in  it  possess  only  that  degree  of  legality  which  they  would 
possess  if  they  existed  separately  ;  their  being  in  the  Decretum  gives  them  no  binding 
force.  In  the  century  after  Gratian,  several  supplementary  collections  of  Decretals 
appeared.  These,  with  many  of  his  own,  were  collected  by  the  orders  of  Gregory  IX., 
who  employed  in  the  work  the  extraordinary  learning  and  acumen  of  St.  Raymond  of 
Pennafort,  into  five  books,  known  as  the  Decretals  of  Gregory  IX.  These  are  in  the 
fullest  sense  authoritative,  having  been  deliberately  ratified  and  published  by  that  Pope 
(1234).  The  Sext,  or  sixth  book  of  the  Decretals,  was  added  by  Boniface  VIII.  (1298). 
The  Clementines  are  named  after  Clement  V.,  who  compiled  them  out  of  the  canons  of 
the  Council  of  Yienne  (1316)  and  some  of  his  own  constitutions.  The  Extravagantes  of 
John  XXII.,  who  succeeded  Clement  V.,  and  the  Extravagantes  Communes,  containing 
the  decretals  of  twenty-five  Popes,  ending  with  Sixtus  IY.  (1484),  complete  the  list.  Of 
these  five  collections — namely  the  Decretals,  the  Sext,  the  Clementines,  the  Extrava- 
gants  of  John  XXII.  and  the  Extravagants  Common — the  'Corpus  Juris  Ecclesiastici ' 
of  the  West  is  made  up." x 

Into  this  body  of  canon  law  of  course  many  of  the  canons  we  shall  have  to  treat  of 
in  the  following  pages  have  been  incorporated  and  so  far  as  possible  I  shall  give  the 
reader  a  reference  which  will  help  his  research  in  this  particular. 

1  Addis  and  Arnold,  A  Catholic  Dictionary,  sub  voce  Canon  Law. 


THE  FIRST  ECUMENICAL   COUNCIL 
THE  FIRST  COUNCIL  OF  NICE 

A.D.  325 

Emperor. — Constantine. 
Pope. — Silvester. 


Historical  Introduction. 

TJie  Greed  and  the  Greed  of  Eusebius  of 
Ccesarea. 

Excursus  on  the  ivord  honionsios. 

Excursus  on  the  toords  <yevvr)$evTa  ov  Troirj- 
Qevra. 

The  XX.  Canons,  with  the  Ancient  Epitome 
and  Notes. 

Excursus  to  C.j,  On  the  use  of  the  ivord 
Canon. 

Excursus  to  G.  v,  On  the  xoord  irpo^k- 
peiv. 

Excursus  to  G.  vj,  On  the  Extent  of  Rome's 
Jurisdiction  over  Suburbican  Churches. 

Excursus  to  0.  vij,  On  the  Rise  of  the 
Patriarchate  of  Jerusalem. 


Elenchus. 

Excursus  to  G.  viij,  On  the  Chorepis- 
copi. 

Excursus  to  C.  xj,  On  the  Public  Dis~ 
cipline. 

Excursus  to  C.  xiij.  On  the  Communion  of 
the  SicTc. 

Excursus  to  C.  xv,  On  the  Translation  of 
Bishops. 

Exczirsus  to  C.  xvij,  On  Usury. 

Excursus  to  C.  xix,  On  Deaconesses. 

Excursus  on  the  Number  of  the  Nicene 
Canons,  with  the  Contents  of  the  spurious 
Arabic  Canons. 

Proposed  Action  on  Clerical  Celibacy. 

Tlie  Synodal  Letter  with  the  Decree  on  the 
Keeping  of  Easter. 


vol,  xiv. 


HISTORICAL  INTRODUCTION. 

The  history  of  the  Council  of  Nice  has  been  so  often  written  by  so  many  brilliant  histo- 
rians, from  the  time  of  its  sitting  clown  to  to-day,  that  any  historical  notice  of  the  causes 
leading  to  its  assembling,  or  account  of  its  proceedings,  seems  quite  unnecessary.  The  ed- 
itor, however,  ventures  to  call  the  attention  of  the  reader  to  the  fact  that  in  this,  as  in  eveiy 
other  of  the  Seven  Ecumenical  Councils,  the  question  the  Fathers  considered  was  not  what 
they  supposed  Holy  Scripture  might  mean,  nor  what  they,  from  dpriori  arguments,  thought 
would  be  consistent  with  the  mind  of  God,  but  something  entirely  different,  to  wit,  what 
they  had  received.  They  understood  their  position  to  be  that  of  witnesses,  not  that  of  exe- 
getes.  They  recognized  but  one  duty  resting  upon  them  in  this  respect — to  hand  down  to 
other  faithful  men  that  good  thing  the  Church  had  received  according  to  the  command  of 
God.  The  first  requirement  was  not  learning,  but  honesty.  The  question  they  were  called 
upon  to  answer  was  not,  What  do  I  think  probable,  or  even  certain,  from  Holy  Scripture  ? 
but,  What  have  I  been  taught,  what  has  been  intrusted  to  me  to  hand  down  to  others  ? 
When  the  time  came,  in  the  Fourth  Council,  to  examine  the  Tome  of  Pope  St.  Leo,  the 
question  was  not  whether  it  could  be  proved  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  assembled  fathers 
from  Holy  Scripture,  but  whether  it  was  the  traditional  faith  of  the  Church.  It  was  not  the 
doctrine  of  Leo  in  the  fifth  century,  but  the  doctrine  of  Peter  in  the  first,  and  of  the  Church 
since  then,  that  they  desired  to  believe  and  to  teach,  and  so,  when  they  had  studied  the 
Tome,  they  cried  out : l 

"This  is  the  faith  of  the  Fathers!  This  is  the  faith  of  the  Apostles!  .  .  .  Peter 
hath  thus  spoken  by  Leo  !     The  Apostles  thus  taught !     Cyril  thus  taught !  "  etc. 

No  Acts  of  either  of  the  first  two  Ecumenical  Councils  have  been  handed  down.3 


1  This  is  clearly  set  forth  by  Pope  Vigilius  as  follows  :  "  No 
one  can  doubt  that  our  fathers  believed  that  they  should  receive 
with  veneration  the  letter  of  blessed  Leo  if  they  declared  it  to 
agree  with  the  doctrines  of  the  Nicene  and  Constantinopolitan 
Councils,  as  also  with  those  of  blessed  Cyril,  set  forth  in  the  first 
of  Ephesus.  And  if  that  letter  of  so  great  a  Pontiff,  shining 
with  so  bright  a  light  of  the  orthodox  Faith,  needed  to  be  ap- 
proved by  these  comparisons,  how  can  that  letter  to  Maris  the 
Persian,  which  specially  rejects  the  First  Council  of  Ephesus  and 
declares  to  be  heretical  the  expressed  doctrines  of  the  blessed 
Cyril,  be  believed  to  have  been  called  orthodox  by  these  same 
Fathers,  condemning  as  it  does  those  writings,  by  comparison 
with  which,  as  we  have  said,  the  doctrine  of  so  great  a  Pontiff 
deeervedto  be  commended?"— Vigil.,  Constitutum  vro  darnna- 


tione  Trium  Capitulorum.    Migne,  rat.  Lat.,  torn.  Ixix.,  col. 

J  162. 

3  About  twenty-five  years  ago  Mr.  Eugene  Eevillout  diecov- 

j  ered,  in  the  Museum  of  Turin,  two  fragments  in  Coptic  which 
he  supposed  to  be  portions  of  the  Acts  of  this  Council  (of  which 
the  rest  are  still  missing)  incorporated  into  the  Acts  of  a  Council 
held  at  Alexandria  in  362.  But  there  is  too  little  known  about 
these  fragments  to  attribute  to  them  any  fixed  value.  I  therefore 
only  refer  the  reader  to  the  literature  on  the  subject— Journal 
Asiatique,  Fevrier-Mars,  1873 ;  Annates  de  Philosophie  Chriti- 
ennc,  Juin,  1873;  Revue  de  Questions  Historiques,  Avril,  1874; 
M.  W.  Guettee,  Histoire  de  VjSglise,  t.  m.,  p.  21 ;  Eugene  R6- 
villout,  he  Concile  de  Side  et  U  Concile  d'Alexandrie  .  .  . 
d'apiis  les  textes  Copies. 


THE    NICENE    CREED 


(Found  in  the  Acts  of  the  Ecumenical  Councils  of  Ephesus  and  Chalcedon,  in  the  Epis- 
tle of  Eusebius  of  Gcesarea  to  his  oion  Church,  in  the  Epistle  of  St  Athanasius  Ad 
Jovianum  Imp.,  in  the  Ecclesiastical  Histories  of  Theodoret  and  Socrates,  and  elseiohere, 
The  variations  in  the  text  are  absolutely  ivithout  importance) 

The  Synod  at  Nice  set  forth  this  Creed.1 

The  Ecthesis  of  the  Synod  at  Nice.2 

"We  believe  in  one  God,  the  Father  Al- 
mighty, maker  of  all  things  visible  and  in- 
visible ;  and  in  one  Lord  Jesns  Christ,  the 
Son  of  God,  the  only-begotten  of  his  Fa- 
ther, of  the  substance  of  the  Father,  God 
of  God,  Light  of  Light,  very  God  of  very 
God,  begotten  (yevvrjSivTa),  not  made,  be- 
ing of  one  substance  (ofioovaiov,  consub- 
stantialem)  with  the  Father.  By  whom  all 
things  were  made,  both  which  be  in  heaven 
and  in  earth.  Who  for  us  men  and  for  our 
salvation  came  down  [from  heaven]  and  was 
incarnate  and  was  made  man.  He  suffered 
and  the  third  day  he  rose  again,  and  as- 
cended into  heaven.  And  he  shall  come 
again  to  judge  both  the  quick  and  the 
dead.  And  [we  believe]  in  the  Holy  Ghost. 
And  whosoever  shall  say  that  there  was  a 
time  when  the  Son  of  God  was  not  (rjv  irore 
ore  ovk  rjv),  or  that  before  he  was  begotten 
he  was  not,  or  that  he  was  made  of  things 
that  were  not,  or  that  he  is  of  a  different 
substance  or  essence  [from  the  Father]  or 
that  he  is  a  creature,  or  subject  to  change 
or  conversion 3 — all  that  so  say,  the  Catho- 
lic and  Apostolic  Church  anathematizes 
them. 


NOTES 

The  Creed  of  Eusebius  of  Caesarea,  which 
he  presented  to  the  council,  and  which  some 
suppose  to  have  suggested  the  creed  finally 
adopted. 

(Found  in  his  Eiristle  to  his  diocese;  vide : 
St.  Athanasius  and  Theodoret.) 

We  believe  in  one  only  God,  Father  Al- 
mighty, Creator  of  things  visible  and  invisi- 
ble ;  and  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  for  he  is 
the  Word  of  God,  God  of  God,  Light  of  Light, 
life  of  life,  his  only  Son,  the  first-born  of  all 
creatures,  begotten  of  the  Father  before  all 
time,  by  whom  also  everything  was  created, 
who  became  flesh  for  our  redemption,  who 
lived  and  suffered  amongst  men,  rose  again 
the  third  day,  returned  to  the  Father,  and 
will  come  again  one  day  in  his  glory  to  judge 
the  quick  and  the  dead.  We  believe  also  in 
the  Holy  Ghost.  We  believe  that  each  of 
these  three  is  and  subsists  ;  the  Father  truly 
as  Father,  the  Son  truly  as  Son,  the  Holy 
Ghost  truly  as  Holy  Ghost  ;  as  our  Lord 
also  said,  when  he  sent  his  disciples  to 
preach  :  Go  and  teach  all  nations,  and  baptize 
them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the 
Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 


EXCURSUS  ON  THE  WORD  HOMOUSIOS.4 

The  Fathers  of  the  Council  at  Nice  were  at  one  time  ready  to  accede  to  the  request  of 
some  of  the  bishops  and  use  only  scriptural  expressions  in  their  definitions.  But,  after 
several  attempts,  they  found  that  all  these  were  capable  of  being  explained  away.  Athan- 
asius describes  with  much  wit  and  penetration  how  he  saw  them  nodding  and  winking  to 
each  other  when  the  orthodox  proposed  expressions  which  they  had  thought  of  a  way  of 
escaping  from  the  force  of.  After  a  series  of  attempts  of  this  sort  it  was  found  that  some- 
thing clearer  and  more  unequivocal  must  be  adopted  if  real  unity  of  faith  was  to  be  attained  ; 
and   accordingly  the  word  homousios  was  adopted.     Just  what  the  Council  intended  this 


1  This  is  the  heading  in  the  Acts  of  the  nid  Council.  Labbe, 
Cone,  torn,  iii.,  671. 

2  This  is  the  heading  in  the  Acts  of  the  IVth  Council.  Labbe, 
Cone,  torn,  iv.,  339. 

3  This  word,  in  the  Greek  -rpemhv,  is  translated  in  the  Latin 
convertibilem,  but  see  side  note  in  Labbe. 

4  Our  older  English  writers  usually  wrote  this  word  "■  homoou- 
sion,"  and  thus  spoke  of  the  doctrine  as  "  the  doctrine  of  the 
homoousion."    For  theArian  word  they  wrote  "homoiousion." 


Later  writers  have  used  the  nominative  masculine,  "homo- 
ousios "  and  "  homoiousios."  The  great  Latin  writers  did  not 
thus  transliterate  the  word,  but,  wrote  "  homousios,"  and  for  the 
heretical  word  ,;  homooesios  "  or  "homoesios."  I  have  kept  for 
the  noun  signifying  the  doctrine,  our  old  English  "  Homoou- 
sion," but  for  the  adjective,  I  have  used  the  ordinary  latinized 
form  "homousios,"  in  this  copying  Smith  and  Wace,  Vict.  Chris- 
tian Antiquities, 


B  2 


4 


I.  NICE.    A.D.  325 


expression  to  mean  is  set  forth  by  St.  Athanasius  as  follows:  "That  the  Son  is  not  only 
like  to  the  Father,  but  that,  as  his  image,  he  is  the  same  as  the  Father ;  that  he  is  of  the 
Father;  and  that  the  resemblance  of  the  Son  to  the  Father,  and  his  immutability,  are 
different  from  ours  :  for  in  us  they  are  something  acquired,  and  arise  from  our  fulfilling  the 
divine  commands.  Moreover,  they  wished  to  indicate  by  this  that  his  generation  is  different 
from  that  of  human  nature  ;  that  the  Son  is  not  only  like  to  the  Father,  but  inseparable 
from  the  substance  of  the  Father,  that  he  and  the  Father  are  one  and  the  same,  as  the  Son 
himself  said  :  '  The  Logos  is  always  in  the  Father,  and,  the  Father  always  in  the  Logos,'  as 
the  sun  and  its  splendour  are  inseparable."1 

The  word  homousios  had  not  had,  although  frequently  used  before  the  Council  of  Nice, 
a  very  happy  history.  It  was  probably  rejected  by  the  Council  of  Antioch,2  and  was  sus- 
pected of  being  open  to  a  Sabellian  meaning.  It  was  accepted  by  the  heretic  Paul  of  Sam- 
osata  and  this  rendered  it  very  offensive  to  many  in  the  Asiatic  Churches. 

On  the  other  hand  the  word  is  used  four  times  by  St.  Irenseus,  and  Pamphilus  the  Martyr 
is  quoted  as  asserting  that  Origen  used  the  very  word  in  the  Nicene  sense.  Tertullian  also 
uses  the  expression  "  of  one  substance  "  (unius  substantias)  in  two  places,  and  it  would  seem 
that  more  than  half  a  century  before  the  meeting  of  the  Council  of  Nice,  it  was  a  common 
one  among  the  Orthodox. 

Vasquez  treats  this  matter  at  some  length  in  his  Disputations,3  and  points  out  how  well 
the  distinction  is  drawn  by  Epiphanius  between  Synousios  and  Homousios,  "for  synousios 
signifies  such  an  unity  of  substance  as  allows  of  no  distinction  :  wherefore  the  Sabellians 
would  admit  this  word  :  but  on  the  contrary  homousios  signifies  the  same  nature  and  sub- 
stance but  with  a  distinction  between  persons  one  from  the  other.  Rightly,  therefore,  has 
the  Church  adopted  this  word  as  the  one  best  calculated  to  confute  the  Arian  heresy."1 

It  may  perhaps  be  well  to  note  that  these  words  are  formed  like  6/j.6(3io<;  and  6/<.oidj3ios, 
bp.oyvoijji.wv  and  bfioioyvujfjuov,  etc.,  etc. 

The  reader  will  find  this  whole  doctrine  treated  at  great  length  in  all  the  bodies  of 
divinity ;  and  in  Alexander  Natalis  (H.E.  t.  iv.,  Diss,  xiv.) ;  he  is  also  referred  to  Pearson, 
On  the  Creed  ;  Bull,  Defence  of  the  Nicene  Creed ;  Forbes,  An  Explanation  of  the  Nicene 
Creed  ;  and  especially  to  the  little  book,  written  in  answer  to  the  recent  criticisms  of  Pro- 
fessor Harnack,  by  H.  B.  S^Yete,  D.D.,  Tlie  Apostles'  Creed. 

EXCURSUS    ON    THE    WORDS    ycvvr,SivTa    ov    TToirjMvTa. 
(J.  B.  Lightfoot.     Tiie  Apostolic  Fathers—Part  II.  Vol.  ii.  Sec.  I.  pp.  90,  et  seqq.) 

The  Son  is  here  [Ignat.  Ad.  Eph.  vii.]  declared  to  be  yewijros  as  man  and  dyeVv^ros  as  God, 
for  this  is  clearly  shown  to  be  the  meaning  from  the  parallel  clauses.  Such  language  is  not 
in  accordance  with  later  theological  definitions,  which  carefully  distinguished  between  yev-q- 
tos  and  yewqTO';  between  dyeVryrog  and  dyeW^Tos ;  so  that  yivqros,  dyeV^ros  respectively  denied  and 
affirmed  the  eternal  existence,  being  equivalent  to  ktioto's,  a/maros,  while  yewnros,  ayewwros 
described  certain  ontological  relations,  whether  in  time  or  in  eternity.  In  the  later  theolog- 
ical language,  therefore,  the  Son  was  yew^rds  even  in  his  Godhead.  See  esp.  Joann.  Damasc. 
de  Fid.  Orth.  i.  8  [where  he  draws  the  conclusion  that  only  the  Father  is  dyeVvvjTos,  and 
only  the  Son  ywr/rds] . 

There  can  be  little  doubt  however,  that  Ignatius  wrote  yevv^To?  ko.1  dyeVv>jTos,  though  his 
editors  frequently  alter  it  into  yevrjTos  nal  dyeV^ros.  For  (1)  the  Greek  MS.  still  retains  the 
double  [Greek  nun]  v,  though  the  claims  of  orthodoxy  would  be  a  temptation  to  scribes  to 


1  Athanas,  Be  Beeret.  Syn.  Nic,  c.  six.  et  seq. 
-  Vide  Swainson,  in  Smith    and  Wace,     Diet.  Christ.  Biog., 
suh  voce  Homousios,  p.  134. 
3  Vasquez,  Bisput.  cix.,  cap.  v.    "  Rightly  doth  the  Church 


use  the  expression  Homousios  (that  is  Consubstantial)  to  express 
that  the  Father  and  the  Son  are  of  the  same  nature." 

4  Vasquez  may  also  well  be   consulted  on  the   expressions 
i)vaia,  substantia,  imSo-rams,  etc. 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


substitute  the  single  v.  And  to  this  reading  also  the  Latin  genitus  et  ingenitus  points.  On 
the  other  hand  it  cannot  be  concluded  that  translators  who  give  /actus  et  non  /actus  had  the 
words  with  one  v,  for  this  was  after  all  what  Ignatius  meant  by  the  double  v,  and  they  would 
naturally  render  his  words  so  as  to  make  his  orthodoxy  apparent.  (2)  When  Theodore t 
writes  yewijTos  ££  ayevvrfrov,  it  is  clear  that  he,  or  the  person  before  him  who  first  substituted 
this  reading,  must  have  read  yevnjros  «<u  ayiwrjTos,  for  there  would  be  no  temptation  to  alter 
the  perfectly  orthodox  yei^ros  koI  ayevyros,  nor  (if  altered)  would  it  have  taken  this  form. 
(3)  When  the  interpolator  substitutes  6  /wos  aXrjSivbs  ©eos  6  dyeVv^ros  .  .  .  toG  Sc  wovoyo- 
i/ovs  Trarrjp  ko.1  yewrjTup,  the  natural  inference  is  that  he  too,  had  the  forms  in  double  y,  which 
he  retained,  at  the  same  time  altering  the  whole  run  of  the  sentence  so  as  not  to  do  violence 
to  his  own  doctrinal  views  ;  see  Bull  De/.  Fid.  Nic.  ii.  2  §  6.  (-1)  The  quotation  in  Athana- 
sius  is  more  difficult.  The  MSS.  vary,  and  his  editors  write  yenjros  kcu  dyeV^ros.  Zahn  too, 
who  has  paid  more  attention  to  this  point  than  any  previous  editor  of  Ignatius,  in  his  former 
work  (Ign.  v.  Ant.  p.  584),  supposed  Athanasius  to  have  read  and  written  the  words  with  a 
single  v,  though  in  his  subsequent  edition  of  Ignatius  (p.  338)  he  declares  himself  unable  to 
determine  between  the  single  and  double  v.  I  believe,  however,  that  the  argument  of 
Athanasius  decides  in  favour  of  the  vy.  Elsewhere  he  insists  repeatedly  on  the  distinction 
between  kti^uv  and  yeiWi>,  justifying  the  use  of  the  latter  term  as  applied  to  the  divinity  of 
the  Son,  and  defending  the  statement  in  the  Nicene  Creed  yevvrjTov  e«  t^s  owrtag  tov  7rarpos  rbv 
vlbv  6fioov<TLov  (De  Synod.  54,  1,  p.  612).  Although  he  is  not  responsible  for  the  language  of 
the  Macrostich  (De  Synod.  3,  1,  p.  590),  and  would  have  regarded  it  as  inadequate  without 
the  ofxoovo-Lov,  yet  this  use  of  terms  entirely  harmonizes  with  his  own.  In  the  passage  before 
us,  ib.  §§  46,  47  (p.  607),  he  is  defending  the  iise  of  homousios  at  Nicsea,  notwithstanding 
that  it  had  been  previously  rejected  by  the  council  which  condemned  Paul  of  Samosata,  and 
he  contends  that  both  councils  were  orthodox,  since  they  used  homousios  in  a  different 
sense.  As  a  parallel  instance  he  takes  the  word  dyeWrjros  which  like  homousios  is  not  a  script- 
ural word,  and  like  it  also  is  used  in  two  ways,  signifying  either  (1)  To  bv  fiev,  fx-qre.  Se  yev- 
vrjSlv  [xrJTe  6'A.ws  exw  T0V  ahtoi',  or  (2)  To  olktkttov.  In  the  former  sense  the  Son  cannot  be  called 
ayei'vrjTos,  in  the  latter  he  may  be  so  called.  Both  uses,  he  says,  are  found  in  the  fathers. 
Of  the  latter  he  quotes  the  passage  in  Ignatius  as  an  example  ;  of  the  former  he  says,  that 
some  writers  subsequent  to  Ignatius  declare  ev  to  ayewrjTov  6  irar^p,  «at  as  6  Z$  avrov  vios  y^o-tos, 
yiwrj^a  a\rj9ivov  k.  t.  X.  [He  may  have  been  thinking  of  Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  vi.  7,  which  I 
shall  quote  below.]  He  maintains  that  both  are  orthodox,  as  having  in  view  two  different 
senses  of  the  word  ayewrjTov,  and  the  same,  he  argues,  is  the  case  with  the  councils  which 
seem  to  take  opposite  sides  with  regard  to  homousios.  It  is  clear  from  this  passage,  as  Zahn 
truly  says,  that  Athanasius  is  dealing  with  one  and  the  same  word  throughout  ;  and,  if  so, 
it  follows  that  this  word  must  be  ayiwrjrov,  since  ayivqrov  would  be  intolerable  in  some 
places.  I  may  add  by  way  of  caution  that  in  two  other  passages,  de  Decret.  Syn.  Nic.  28 
(1,  p.  184),  Orat.  c.  Avian,  i.  30  (1,  p.  343),  St.  Athanasius  gives  the  various  senses  of  ayivrjTov 
(for  this  is  plain  from  the  context),  and  that  these  passages  ought  not  to  be  treated  as 
parallels  to  the  present  passage  which  is  concerned  with  the  senses  of  ayiw-qrov.  Much  con- 
fusion is  thus  created,  e.g.  in  Newman's  notes  on  the  several  passages  in  the  Oxford  transla^ 
tion  of  Athanasius  (pp.  51  sq.,  224  sq.),  where  the  three  passages  are  treated  as  parallel,  and 
no  attempt  is  made  to  discriminate  the  readings  in  the  several  places,  but  "  ingenerate  "  is 
given  as  the  rendering  of  both  alike.  If  then  Athanasius  who  read  yemjros  ko.1  dyeVi^ros  in 
Ignatius,  there  is  absolutely  no  authority  for  the  spelling  with  one  v.  The  earlier  editors 
(Voss,  TJssher,  Cotelier,  etc.),  printed  it  as  they  found  it  in  the  MS.;  but  Smith  substituted 
the  forms  with  the  single  v,  and  he  has  been  followed  more  recently  by  Hefele,  Dressel,  and 
some  other.     In  the  Casanatensian  copy  of  the  MS.,  a  marginal  note  is  added,  avayrwo-Ttov 


6  I.  NICE.    A.D.  325 


ayivr]To<;  tovt  «m  fxr]  woi^ei's.  Watei'land  (Works,  III.,  p.  240  sq.,  Oxf.  1823)  tries  ineffectu- 
ally to  show  that  the  form  with  the  double  v  was  invented  by  the  fathers  at  a  later  date  to 
express  their  theological  conception.  He  even  "  doubts  whether  there  was  any  such  word  as 
ayivvrjTos  so  early  as  the  time  of  Ignatius."     In  this  he  is  certainly  wrong. 

The  MSS.  of  early  Christian  writers  exhibit  much  confusion  between  these  words  spelled 
with  the  double  and  the  single  v.  See  e.g.  Justin  Dial.  2,  with  Otto's  note  ;  Athenag.  Suppl. 
4  with  Otto's  note;  Theophil,  ad  Autol.  ii.  3,  4;  Iren.  iv.  38,  1,  3;  Orig.  c.  Cels.  vi.  66; 
Method,  de  Lib.  Arbitr.,  p.  57  ;  Jahn  (see  Jahn's  note  11,  p.  122) ;  Maximus  in  Euseb.  Praep. 
Ev.  vii.  22  ;  Hippol.  Haer.  v.  16  (from  Sibylline  Oracles)  ;  Clem.  Alex.  Strom  v.  14  ;  and  very 
frequently  in  later  writers.  Yet  notwithstanding  the  confusion  into  which  later  transcribers 
have  thus  thrown  the  subject,  it  is  still  possible  to  ascertain  the  main  facts  respecting  the 
usage  of  the  two  forms.  The  distinction  between  the  two  terms,  as  indicated  by  their  origin, 
is  that  uyivrjTos  denies  the  creation,  and  aykw-qTos  the  generation  or  parentage.  Both  are  used  at 
a  very  early  date  ;  e.g.  ayivvTos  by  Parmenides  in  Clein.  Alex.  Strom,  v.  14,  and  by  Agothon  in 
Arist.  Eth.  Nic.  vii.  2  (comp.  also  Orac.  Sibyll.  prooem.  7,  17) ;  and  ayivv-qros  in  Soph.  Traeh. 
61  (where  it  is  equivalent  to  Svayevwv).  Here  the  distinction  of  meaning  is  strictly  preserved, 
and  so  probably  it  always  is  in  Classical  writers  ;  for  in  Soph.  Trach,  743  we  should  after 
Porson  and  Hermann  read  ayivrjTov  with  Suidas.  In  Christian  writers  also  there  is  no  reason 
to  suppose  that  the  distinction  was  ever  lost,  though  in  certain  connexions  the  words  might 
be  used  convertibty.  Whenever,  as  here  in  Ignatius,  we  have  the  double  v  where  we  should 
expect  the  single,  we  must  ascribe  the  fact  to  the  indistinctness  or  incorrectness  of  the 
writer's  theological  conceptions,  not  to  any  obliteration  of  the  meaning  of  the  terms  them- 
selves. To  this  early  father  for  instance  the  eternal  yeVi^o-is  of  the  Son  was  not  a  distinct 
theological  idea,  though  substantially  he  held  the  same  views  as  the  Nicene  fathers  respect- 
ing the  Person  of  Christ.  The  following  passages  from  early  Christian  writers  will  serve 
at  once  to  show  how  far  the  distinction  was  appreciated,  and  to  what  extent  the  Nicene 
conception  prevailed  in  ante-Nicene  Christianity ;  Justin  Apol.  ii.  6,  comp.  ib.  §  13  ;  Athenag. 
Suppl.  10  (comp.  ib.  4) ;  Theoph.  ad.  Aut.  ii.  3  ;  Tatian  Oral.  5  ;  Rhodon  in  Euseb.  H  E.  v. 
13  ;  Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  vi.  7  ;  Orig.  c.  Cels.  vi.  17,  ib.  vi.  52  ;  Concil.  Antioch  (a.d.  269)  in 
Routh  Bel.  Sacr.  III.,  p.  290 ;  Method,  de  Great.  5.  In  no  early  Christian  writing,  however, 
is  the  distinction  more  obvious  than  in  the  Clementine  Homilies,  x.  10  (where  the  distinction 
is  employed  to  support  the  writer's  heretical  theology)  :  see  also  viii.  16,  and  comp.  xix.  3, 
4,  9,  12.  The  following  are  instructive  passages  as  regards  the  use  of  these  words  where 
the  opinions  of  other  heretical  writers  are  given  ;  Saturninus,  Iren.  i.  24,  1  ;  Hippol.  Haer. 
vii.  28  ;  Simon  Magus,  Hippol.  Haer.  vi.  17,  18  ;  the  Valentinians,  Hippol.  Haer.  vi.  29,  30 ; 
the  Ptolemseus  in  particular,  Ptol.  Ep.  ad.  Flor.  4  (in  Stieren's  Irenaeus,  p.  935)  ;  Basilides, 
Hippol.  Haer.  vii.  22  ;  Carpocrates,  Hippol.  Haer.  vii.  32. 

From  the  above  passages  it  will  appear  that  Ante-Nicene  writers  were  not  indifferent  to 
the  distinction  of  meaning  between  the  two  words ;  and  when  once  the  othodox  Christology 
was  formulated  in  the  Nicene  Creed  in  the  words  yewrjSivTa  ov  TToindivra,  it  became  henceforth 
impossible  to  overlook  the  difference.  The  Son  was  thus  declared  to  be  yevnjros  but  not 
yei/^Tos.  I  am  therefore  unable  to  agree  with  Zahn  (Marcellus,  pp.  40,  104,  223,  Ign.  von  Ant. 
p.  565),  that  at  the  time  of  the  Arian  controversy  the  disputants  were  not  alive  to  the  differ- 
ence of  meaning.  See  for  example  Epiphanius,  Haer.  lxiv.  8.  But  it  had  no  especial  inter- 
est for  them.  While  the  orthodox  party  clung  to  the  homousios  as  enshrining  the  doctrine 
for  which  they  fought,  they  had  no  liking  for  the  terms  dyeV^i-os  and  y«w??ros  as  applied  to 
the  Father  and  the  Son  respectively,  though  unable  to  deny  their  propriety,  because  they 
were  affected  by  the  Arians  and  applied  in  their  own  way.  To  the  orthodox  mind  the  Arian 
formula  ovk  rjv  irpiv  ywvr)9r]rai  or  some  Semiarian  formula  hardly  less  dangerous,  seemed 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


always  to  be  lurking  under  the  expression  ©«os  yewrjTos  as  applied  to  the  Son.  Hence  the 
language  of  Epiphanius  Haer.  lxxiii.  19 :  "As  you  refuse  to  accept  our  homousios  because 
though  used  by  the  fathers,  it  does  not  occur  in  the  Scriptures,  so  will  we  decline  on  the 
same  grounds  to  accept  your  dyeV^ros."  Similarly  Basil  c.  Eunom.  i.,  iv.,  and  especially  ib. 
further  on,  in  which  last  passage  he  argues  at  great  length  against  the  position  of  the  here- 
tics, €i  ayivvrjTOS,  (f>a<rlv,  6  irarrjp,  yevvTjTos  Se  6  vios,  ov  Trjs  avTrj<;  oucri'a?.      See   also  the   arguments 

against  the  Anomoeans  in  [Athan.]  Dial,  de  Trin.  ii.  passim.  This  fully  explains  the  reluc- 
tance of  the  orthodox  party  to  handle  terms  which  their  adversaries  used  to  endanger  the 
homousios.  But,  when  the  stress  of  the  Arian  controversy  was  removed,  it  became  conven- 
ient to  express  the  Catholic  doctrine  by  saying  that  the  Son  in  his  divine  nature  was  yiwrjTos 
but  not  yenjTo?.  And  this  distinction  is  staunchly  maintained  in  later  orthodox  writers,  e.g. 
John  of  Damascus,  already  quoted  in  the  beginning  of  this  Excursus. 


8 


THE  CANONS   OF  THE   318   HOLY  FATHERS  ASSEMBLED   IN 
THE  CITY  OF  NICE,  IN  BITHYNIA. 

CANON  I. 

If  any  one  in  sickness  has  been  subjected  by  physicians  to  a  surgical  operation,  or 
if  he  has  been  castrated  by  barbarians,  let  him  remain  among  the  clergy ;  but,  if  any 
one  in  sound  health  has  castrated  himself,  it  behoves  that  such  an  one,  if  [already]  en- 
rolled among  the  clergy,  should  cease  [from  his  ministry],  and  that  from  henceforth  no 
such  person  should  be  promoted.  But,  as  it  is  evident  that  this  is  said  of  those  who 
wilfully  do  the  thing  and  presume  to  castrate  themselves,  so  if  any  have  been  made 
eunuchs  by  barbarians,  or  by  their  masters,  and  should  otherwise  be  found  worthy, 
such  men  the  Canon  admits  to  the  clergy. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome1  of  Canon  I. 


Eunuchs  may  be  received  into  the  number  of 
the  clergy,  but  those  who  castrate  themselves  shall 
not  be  received. 

Balsamon. 
The  divine  Apostolic  Canons  xxi.,  xxii.,  xxiii., 
and  xxiv.,  have  taught  us  sufficiently  what 
ought  to  be  done  with  those  who  castrate 
themselves,  this  canon  provides  as  to  what  is 
to  be  done  to  these  as  well  as  to  those  who 
deliver  themselves  over  to  others  to  be  emas- 
culated by  them,  viz.,  that  they  are  not  to  be 
admitted  among  the  clergy  nor  advanced  to 
the  priesthood. 

Daniel  Butler. 
(Smith  &  Cheetham,  Diet.  Christ.  Ant.) 

The  feeling  that  one  devoted  to  the  sacred 
ministry  should  be  unmutilated  was  strong  in 
the  Ancient  Church.  .  .  .  This  canon  of 
Nice,  and  those  in  the  Apostolic  Canons  and  a 
later  one  in  the  Second  Council  of  Aries  (canon 
vii.)  were  aimed  against  that  perverted  notion 
of  piety,  originating  in  the  misinterpretation 
of  our  Lord's  saying  (Matt.  xix.  12)  by  which 
Origen,  among  others,  was  misled,  and  their 
observance  was  so  carefully  enforced  in  later 
times  that  not  more  than  one  or  two  instances 
of  the  practice  which  they  condemn  are 
noticed  by  the  historian.  The  case  was  dif- 
ferent if  a  man  was  born  an  eunuch  or  had 
suffered  mutilation  at  the  hands  of  persecut- 
ors; an  instance  of  the  former,  Dorotheus, 
presbyter  of  Antioch,  is  mentioned  by  Euse- 
bius  (H.  E.  vii.,  c.  32) ;  of  the  latter,  Tigris, 
presbyter  of  Constantinople,  is  referred  to 
both  by  Socrates  {H.  E.  vi.  15)  and  Sozomen 
(H.  E.  vi.  24)  as  the  victim  of  a  barbarian 
master. 

1  For  the  authority  of  this  epitome  vide  Introduction. 


Hefele. 


We  know,  by  the  first  apology  of  St.  Justin 
(Apol.  c.  29)  that  a  century  before  Origen,  a 
young  man  had  desired  to  be  mutilated  by 
physicians,  for  the  purpose  of  completely  re- 
futing the  charge  of  vice  which  the  heathen 
brought  against  the  worship  of  Christians.  St. 
Justin  neither  praises  nor  blames  this  young 
man  :  he  only  relates  that  he  could  not  obtain 
the  permission  of  the  civil  authorities  for  his 
project,  that  he  renounced  his  intention,  but 
nevertheless  remained  virgo  all  his  life.  It  i3 
very  probable  that  the  Council  of  Nice  was  in- 
duced by  some  fresh  similar  cases  to  renew  the 
old  injunctions  ;  it  was  perhaps  the  Arian  bish- 
op, Leontius,  who  was  the  principal  cause  of  it.1 

Lambert. 
Constantine  forbade  by  a  law  the  practice 
condemned  in  this  canon.  "If  anyone  shall 
anywhere  in  the  Roman  Empire  after  this  de- 
cree make  eunuchs,  he  shall  be  punished  with 
death.  If  the  owner  of  the  place  where  the 
deed  was  perpetrated  was  aware  of  it  and  hid 
the  fact,  his  goods  shall  be  confiscated." 
(Const.  M.  Opera.  Migne  Patrol,  vol.  viii.,  396.) 

Beveridge. 
^the  Nicene  fathers  in  this  canon  make  no 
new  enactment  but  only  confirm  by  the  au- 
thority of  an  Ecumenical  synod  the  Apostolic 
Canons,  and  this  is  evident  from  the  wording 
of  this  canon.  For  there  can  be  no  doubt 
that  they  had  in  mind  some  earlier  canon 
when  they  said,  "  such  men  the  canon  admits 
to  the  clergy."  Not,  ovtos  6  Kavwv,  but  6  Kavtov, 
as  if  they  had  said  "the  formerly  set  forth 

1  Leontius  while  still  a  presbyter  lived  with  a  subintroducta  at 
Antioch,  whose  name  was  Eustolion,  so  we  learn  from  St.  Atha- 
nasius,  Theodoret  (IT.  E.  ii.  24)  and  Socrates  (H.  E.  ii.  26) ;  as 
he  could  not  part  from  her  and  wished  to  prevent  her  leaving 
him,  he  mutilated  himself.  His  bishop  deposed  him  for  this  act, 
but  the  Emperor  Constantius  (not  Constantine,  as  by  a  mistake  in 
the  English  Hefele,  1.  p.  377)  practically  forced  him  iDto  the 
episcopal  throne  of  Antioch. 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


and  well-known  canon  "  admits  such  to  the 
clergy.  But  no  other  canon  then  existed  in 
which  this  provision  occurred  except  apostoli- 
cal canon  xxi.  which  therefore  we  are  of  opin- 
ion is  here  cited. 

[In  this  conclusion  Hefele  also  agrees.] 


This  law  was  frequently  enacted  by  sub- 
sequent synods  and  is  inserted  in  the  Cor- 
pus Juris  Canonici,  Decretum  Gratiani.  Pars. 
I.     Distinctio  LV.,  C  vij. 


EXCURSUS  ON  THE  USE  OF  THE  WORD   "CANON." 

(Bright :  Notes  on  the  Canons,  pp.  2  and  3.) 

Kavu>v,  as  an  ecclesiastical  term,  has  a  very  interesting  history.  See  Westcott's  account 
of  it,  On  the  New  Testament  Canon,  p.  498  ff.  The  original  sense,  "a  straight  rod"  or 
"  line,"  determines  all  its  religious  applications,  which  begin  with  St.  Paul's  use  of  it  for 
a  prescribed  sphere  of  apostolic  work  (2  Cor.  x.  13,  15),  or  a  regulative  principle  of  Chris- 
tian life  (Gal.  vi.  16).  It  represents  the  element  of  definiteness  in  Christianity  and  in  the 
order  of  the  Christian  Church.  Clement  of  Rome  uses  it  for  the  measure  of  Christian 
attainment  (Ep.  Cor.  7).  Ireneeus  calls  the  baptismal  creed  "  the  canon  of  truth  "  (i.  9,  4) : 
Polycrates  (Euseb.  v.  24)  and  probably  Hippolytus  (ib.  v.  28)  calls  it  "  the  canon  of  faith  ; " 
the  Council  of  Antioch  in  a.d.  269,  referring  to  the  same  standard  of  orthodox  belief,  speaks 
with  significant  absoluteness  of  "the  canon"  (ib.  vii.  30).  Eusebius  himself  mentions 
"  the  canon  of  truth  "  in  iv.  23,  and  "  the  canon  of  the  preaching "  in  iii.  32  ;  and  so  Basil 
speaks  of  "  the  transmitted  canon  of  true  religion  "  (Epist.  204-6).  Such  language,  like  Ter- 
tullian's  "regula  fidei,"  amounted  to  saying,  "We  Christians  know  what  we  believe  :  it  is  not 
a  vague  '  idea '  without  substance  or  outline  :  it  can  be  put  into  form,  and  by  it  we  '  test  the 
spirits  whether  they  be  of  God.' "  Thus  it  was  natural  for  Socrates  to  call  the  Nicene  Creed 
itself  a  "  canon,"  ii.  27.  Clement  of  Alexandria  uses  the  phrase  "  canon  of  truth  "  for  a  stand- 
ard of  mystic  interpretation,  but  proceeds  to  call  the  harmony  between  the  two  Testaments 
"a  canon  for  the  Church,"  Strom,  vi.  15,  124,  125.  Eusebius  speaks  of  "the  ecclesiastical 
canon  "  which  recognized  no  other  Gospels  than  the  four  (vi.  25).  The  use  of  the  term  and 
its  cognates  in  reference  to  the  Scriptures  is  explained  by  Westcott  in  a  passive  sense  so 
that  "  canonized  "  books,  as  Athanasius  calls  them  (Fest.  Ep.  39),  are  books  expressly  recog- 
nized by  the  Church  as  portions  of  Holy  Scripture.  Again,  as  to  matters  of  observance, 
Clement  of  Alexandria  wrote  a  book  against  Judaizers,  called  "  The  Church's  Canon  "  (Euseb. 
vi.  13)  ;  and  Cornelius  of  Rome,  in  his  letter  to  Fabius,  speaks  of  the  "  canon  "  as  to  what  we 
call  confirmation  (Euseb.  vi.  43),  and  Dionysius  of  the  "  canon  "  as  to  reception  of  converts 
from  heresy  (ib.  vii.  7).  The  Nicene  Council  in  this  canon  refers  to  a  standing  "  canon  "  of 
discipline  (comp.  Nic.  2,  5,  6,  9,  10,  15,  16,  18),  but  it  does  not  apply  the  term  to  its  own 
enactments,  which  are  so  described  in  the  second  canon  of  Constantinople  (see  below),  and 
of  which  Socrates  says  "  that  it  passed  what  are  usually  called  '  canons  '  "  (i.  13),  as  Julius  of 
Rome  calls  a  decree  of  this  Council  a  "  canon  "  (Athan.  Apol.  c.  Ari.  25)  ;  so  Athanasius 
applies  the  term  generally  to  Church  laws  (Encycl.  2  ;  cp.  Apol.  c.  Ari.  69).  The  use  of 
kuvwv  for  the  clerical  body  (Nic.  16,  17,  19  ;  Chalc.  2)  is  explained  by  Westcott  with  refer- 
ence to  the  rule  of  clerical  life,  but  Bingham  traces  it  to  the  roll  or  official  list  on  which  the 
names  of  clerics  were  enrolled  (i.  5,  10)  ;  and  this  appears  to  be  the  more  natural  derivation, 
see  "the  holy  canon  "  in  the  first  canon  of  the  Council  of  Antioch,  and  compare  Socrates  (i. 
17),  "  the  Virgins  enumerated  iv  t<3  tuw  ZkkXtjo-iuiv  kovovi,"  and  (ib.  v.  19)  on  the  addition  of  a 
penitentiary  "  to  the  canon  of  the  church  ; "  see  also  George  of  Laodicea  in  Sozomon,  iv.  13. 
Hence  any  cleric  might  be  called  kcivovikos,  see  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  Procatech.  4  ;  so  we  read 
of  "canonical  singers."    Laodicea,  canon  xv.    The  same  notion  of  definiteness  appears  in 


10 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


the  ritual  use  of  the  word  for  a  series  of  nine  "  odes  "  in  the  Eastern  Church  service  (Neale, 
Introd.  East.  Ch.  ii.  832),  for  the  central  and  unvarying  element  in  the  Liturgy,  beginning 
after  the  Tersanctus  (Hammond,  Liturgies  East  and  West,  p.  377)  ;  or  for  any  Church  office 
(Ducange  in  v.) ;  also  in  its  application  to  a  table  for  the  calculation  of  Easter  (Euseb.  vi.  22  ; 
vii.  32) ;  to  a  scheme  for  exhibiting  the  common  and  peculiar  parts  of  the  several  Gospels  (as 
the  "  Eusebian  canons  ")  and  to  a  prescribed  or  ordinary  payment  to  a  church,  a  use  which 
grew  out  of  one  found  in  Athanasius'  Apol.  c.  Ari.  60. 

In  more  recent  times  a  tendency  has  appeared  to  restrict  the  term  Canon  to  matters  of 
discipline,  but  the  Council  of  Trent  continued  the  ancient  use  of  the  word,  calling  its  doc- 
trinal and  disciplinary  determinations  alike  "Canons." 


CANON  II. 

Forasmuch  as,  either  from  necessity,  or  through  the  urgency  of  individuals,  many 
things  have  been  done  contrary  to  the  Ecclesiastical  canon,  so  that  men  just  converted 
from  heathenism  to  the  faith,  and  who  have  been  instructed  but  a  little  while,  are 
straightway  brought  to  the  spiritual  laver,  and  as  soon  as  they  have  been  baptized,  are 
advanced  to  the  episcopate  or  the  presbyterate,  it  has  seemed  right  to  us  that  for  the 
time  to  come  no  such  thing  shall  be  done.  For  to  the  catechumen  himself  there  is 
need  of  time  and  of  a  longer  trial  after  baptism.  For  the  apostolical  saying  is  clear, 
"  Not  a  novice ;  lest,  being  lifted  up  with  pride,  he  fall  into  condemnation  and  the 
snare  of  the  devil."  But  if,  as  time  goes  on,  any  sensual  sin  should  be  found  out  about 
the  person,  and  he  should  be  convicted  by  two  or  three  witnesses,  let  him  cease  from 
the  clerical  office.  And  whoso  shall  transgress  these  [enactments]  will  imperil  his  own 
clerical  position,  as  a  person  who  presumes  to  disobey  the  great  Synod. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  II. 


Those  who  have  come  from  the  heathen  shall 
not  be  immediately  advanced  to  the  presbyterate. 
For  without  a  probation  of  some  time  a  neophyte 
is  of  no  advantage  (ko.k6<;).  But  if  after  ordi- 
nation it  be  found  out  that  he  had  sinned  pre- 
viously, let  him  then  be  expelled  from  the 
clergy. 

Hefele. 
It  may  be  seen  by  the  very  text  of  this 
canon,  that  it  was  already  forbidden  to  bap- 
tize, and  to  raise  to  the  episcopate  or  to  the 
priesthood  anyone  who  had  only  been  a  cate- 
chumen for  a  short  time  :  this  injunction  is 
in  fact  contained  in  the  eightieth  (seventy- 
ninth)  apostolical  canon  ;  and  according  to 
that,  it  would  be  older  than  the  Council  of 
Nicaea.  There  have  been,  nevertheless,  certain 
cases  in  which,  for  urgent  reasons,  an  excep- 
tion has  been  made  to  the  rule  of  the  Coun- 
cil of  Nicsea— for  instance,  that  of  S.  Ambrose. 
The  canon  of  Nicaea  does  not  seem  to  allow 
such  an  exception,  but  it  might  be  justified 
by  the  apostolical  canon,  which  says,  at  the 
close  :  "  It  is  not  right  that  any  one  who  has 
not  yet  been  proved  should  be  a  teacher  of 


others,  unless  by  a  peculiar  divine  grace." 
The  expression  of  the  canon  of  Nicsea,  \pv\i-<ov 
rt  ajxapTrjfxa,  is  not  easy  to  explain  :  some  ren- 
der it  by  the  Latin  words  animate  peccatam, 
believing  that  the  Council  has  here  especially 
in  view  sins  of  the  flesh  ;  but  as  Zonaras  has 
said,  all  sins  are  if/vx^a  ajxaprr^fxaTa.  We  must 
then  understand  the  passage  in  question  to  re- 
fer to  a  capital  and  very  serious  offence,  as  the 
penalty  of  deposition  annexed  to  it  points  out. 

These  words  have  also  given  offence,  d  8e 
7rpoiwTos  tov  xpovov ;  that  is  to  say,  "It  is 
necessary  henceforward,"  etc.,  understanding 
that  it  is  only  those  who  have  been  too  quickly 
ordained  who  are  threatened  with  deposition 
in  case  they  are  guilty  of  crime  ;  but  the  can- 
on  is  fi*amed,  and  ought  to  be  understood, 
j  in  a  general  manner  :  it  applies  to  all  other 
clergymen,  but"  it  appears  also  to  point  out 
|  that  greater  severity  should  be  shown  toward 
those  who  have  been  too  quickly  ordained. 

Others  have  explained  the  passage  in  this 
manner  :  "  If  it  shall  become  known  that  any 
one  who  has  been  too  quickly  ordained  was 
guilty  before  his  baptism  of  any  serious  of- 
fence, he  ought  to  be  deposed."  This  is  the 
interpretation  given  by  Gratian,  but  it  must 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


11 


be  confessed  that  such  a  translation  does  vio- 
lence to  the  text.  This  is,  I  believe,  the  gen- 
eral sense  of  the  canon,  and  of  this  passage  in 
particular :  "  Henceforward  no  one  shall  be 
baptized  or  ordained  quickly.  As  to  those 
already  in  orders  (without  any  distinction 
between  those  who  have  been  ordained  in  due 
course  and  those  who  have  been  ordained  too 
quickly),  the  rule  is  that  they  shall  be  de- 


posed if  they  commit  a  serious  offence.  Those 
who  are  guilty  of  disobedience  to  this  great 
Synod,  either  by  allowing  themselves  to  be 
ordained  or  even  by  ordaining  others  pre- 
maturely, are  threatened  with  deposition  ipso 
facto,  and  for  this  fault  alone."  We  consider, 
in  short,  that  the  last  words  of  the  canon  may 
be  understood  as  well  of  the  ordained  as  of 
the  ordainer. 


CANON  III. 

The  great  Synod  has  stringently  forbidden  any  bishop,  presbyter,  deacon,  or  any 
one  of  the  clergy  whatever,  to  have  a  subintroducta  dwelling  with  him,  except  only  a 
mother,  or  sister,  or  aunt,  or  such  persons  only  as  are  beyond  all  suspicion. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  III. 
No  one  shall  have  a  woman  in  his  house  ex- 
cept his  mother,  and  sister,  and  persons  alto- 
gether beyond  suspicion. 

Justellus. 
Who  these  mulieres  subintroductse  were 
does  not  sufficiently  appear  .  .  .  but  they 
were  neither  wives  nor  concubines,  but  wom- 
en of  some  third  kind,  which  the  clergy  kept 
with  them,  not  for  the  sake  of  offspring  or 
lust,  but  from  the  desire,  or  certainly  under  the 
pretence,  of  piety. 

Johnson. 
For  want  of  a  proper  English  word  to  ren- 
der it  by,  I  translate  "to  retain  any  woman  in 
their  houses  under  pretence  of  her  being  a 
disciple  to  them." 

Van  Espen 
translates :  And  his  sisters  and  aunts  cannot 
remain  unless  they  be  free  from  all  suspicion. 

Fuchs  in  his  Bibliotheh  der  Jcirchenver 
sammlungen  confesses  that  this  canon  shews 
that    the   practice    of   clerical  celibacy  had 


already  spread  widely.  In  connexion  with  this 
whole  subject  of  the  subintroductae  the  text 
of  St.  Paul  should  be  carefully  considered. 
1  Cor.  ix.  5. 

Heeele. 
It  is  very  certain  that  the  canon  of  Nice 
forbids  such  spiritual  unions,  but  the  context 
shows  moreover  that  the  Fathers  had  not 
these  particular  cases  in  view  alone  ;  and  the 
expression  crwa'craKTos  should  be  understood 
of  every  woman  who  is  introduced  (arwzicraKTO'i) 
into  the  house  of  a  clergyman  for  the  purpose 
of  living  there.  If  by  the  word  a-weio-anras 
was  only  intended  the  wife  in  this  spiritual 
marriage,  the  Council  would  not  have  said, 
any  a-vi'do-anTos,  except  his  mother,  etc.  ;  for 
neither  his  mother  nor  his  sister  could  have 
formed  this  spiritual  union  with  the  cleric. 
The  injunction,  then,  does  not  merely  forbid 
the  owa'yaKTos  in  the  specific  sense,  but  orders 
that  "no  woman  must  live  in  the  house  of  a 
cleric,  unless  she  be  his  mother,"  etc. 

This  canon  is  found  in.  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  I.,  Distinc. 
XXXII.,  C.  xvj. 


CANON  IV. 

It  is  by  all  means  proper  that  a  bishop  should  be  appointed  by  all  the  bishops  in  the 
province ;  but  should  this  be  difficult,  either  on  account  of  urgent  necessity  or  because 
of  distance,  three  at  least  should  meet  together,  and  the  suffrages  of  the  absent  [bishops] 
also  being  given  and  communicated  in  writing,  then  the  ordination  should  take  place. 
But  in  every  province  the  ratification  of  what  is  done  should  be  left  to  the  Metropolitan. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  IV. 
A  bishop  is  to  be  chosen  by  all  the  bishops  of 
the  province,  or  at  least  by  three,  the  rest  giv- 
ing by  letter  their  assent;  but  this  choice  must 
be  confirmed  by  the  Metropolitan. 


ZoNARAS. 

The  present  Canon  might  seem  to  be  op- 
posed to  the  first  canon  of  the  Holy  Apostles, 
for  the  latter  enjoins  that  a  bishop  be  or- 
dained by  two  or  three  bishops,  but  this  by 


12 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


three,  the  absent  also  agreeing  and  testifying 
their  assent  by  writing.  But  they  are  not 
contradictory ;  for  the  Apostolical  canon  by 
ordination  (x«poTovtW)  means  consecration 
and  imposition  of  hands,  but  the  present  can- 
on by  constitution  (Karaa-Tacnv)  and  ordination 
means  the  election,  and  enjoins  that  the  elec- 
tion of  a  bishop  do  not  take  place  unless  three 
assemble,  having  the  consent  also  of  the  absent 
by  letter,  or  a  declaration  that  they  also  will  ac- 
quiesce in  the  election  (or  vote,  t/"?<£w)  made  by 
the  three  who  have  assembled.  But  after  the 
election  it  gives  the  ratification  or  comple- 
tion of  the  matter — the  imposition  of  hands 
and  consecration — to  the  metropolitan  of  the 
province,  so  that  the  election  is  to  be  ratified 
by  him.  He  does  so  when  with  two  or  three 
bishops,  according  to  the  apostolical  canon, 
he  consecrates  with  imposition  of  hands  the 
one  of  the  elected  persons  whom  he  himself 
selects. 

Balsamon 
also  understands  KaSia-Taa-Sai  to  mean  election 
by  vote. 

Bright. 

The  Greek  canonists  are  certainly  in  error 
when  they  interpret  x^porovia  of  election.  The 
canon  is  akin  to  the  1st  Apostolic  canon  which, 
as  the  canonists  admit,  must  refer  to  the  conse- 
cration of  a  new  bishop,  and  it  was  cited  in  that 
sense  at  the  Council  of  Chalcedon — Session 
xiii.  (Mansi.,  vii.  307).  We  must  follow  Bu- 
finus  and  the  old  Latin  translators,  who  sj)eak 
of  "ordinari"  "ordinatio"  and  "manus  im- 
positionem." 

Hepele. 

The  Council  of  Nice  thought  it  necessary 
to  define  by  precise  rules  the  duties  of  the 
bishops  who  took  part  in  these  episcopal 
elections.  It  decided  (a)  that  a  single  bishop 
of  the  province  was  not  sufficient  for  the  ap- 
pointment of  another ;  (b)  three  at  least 
should  meet,  and  (c)  they  were  not  to  proceed 
to  election  without  the  written  permission  of 
the  absent  bishops  ;  it  was  necessary  (d)  to 
obtain  afterward  the  approval  of  the  metro- 
politan. The  Council  thus  confirms  the  ordi- 
nary metropolitan  division  in  its  two  most 
important  points,  namely,  the  nomination  and 
ordination  of  bishops,  and  the  superior  posi- 
tion of  the  metropolitan.  The  third  point 
connected  with  this  division  —  namely,  the 
provincial  synod — will  be  considered  under 
the  next  canon. 

Meletius  was  probably  the  occasion  of  this 
canon.     It  may  be  remembered  that  he  had 


nominated  bishops  without  the  concurrence 
of  the  other  bishops  of  the  province,  and 
without  the  approval  of  the  metropolitan  of 
Alexandria,  and  had  thus  occasioned  a  schism. 
This  canon  was  intended  to  prevent  the  re- 
currence of  such  abuses.  The  question  has 
been  raised  as  to  whether  the  fourth  canon 
speaks  only  of  the  choice  of  the  bishop,  or 
whether  it  also  treats  of  the  consecration  of 
the  newly  elected.  We  think,  with  Van  Es- 
pen,  that  it  treats  equally  of  both, — as  well  of 
the  part  which  the  bishops  of  the  province 
should  take  in  an  episcopal  election,  as  of  the 
consecration  which  completes  it. 

This  canon  has  been  interpreted  in  two 
ways.  The  Greeks  had  learnt  by  bitter 
experience  to  distrust  the  interference  of 
princes  and  earthly  potentates  in  episcopal 
elections.  Accordingly,  they  tried  to  prove 
that  this  canon  of  Nice  took  away  from  the 
people  the  right  of  voting  at  the  nomination 
of  a  bishop,  and  confined  the  nomination  ex- 
clusively to  the  bishops  of  the  province. 

The  Greek  Commentators,  Balsamon  and 
others,  therefore,  only  followed  the  example 
of  the  Seventh  and  [so-called]  Eighth  (Ecu- 
menical Councils  in  affirming  that  this  fourth 
canon  of  Nice  takes  away  from  the  people  the 
light  previously  possessed  of  voting  in  the 
choice  of  bishops  and  makes  the  election  de- 
pend entirely  on  the  decision  of  the  bishops 
of  the  province. 

The  Latin  Church  acted  otherwise.  It  is 
true  that  with  it  also  the  people  have  been  re- 
moved from  episcopal  elections,  but  this  did 
not  happen  till  later,  about  the  eleventh  cen- 
tury ;  and  it  was  not  the  people  only  who  were 
removed,  but  the  bishops  of  the  province  as 
well,  and  the  election  was  conducted  entirely 
by  the  clergy  of  the  Cathedral  Church.  The 
Latins  then  interpreted  the  canon  of  Nice  as 
though  it  said  nothing  of  the  rights  of  the 
bishops  of  the  province  in  the  election  of  their 
future  colleague  (and  it  does  not  speak  of  it 
in  a  very  explicit  manner),  and  as  though  it 
determined  these  two  points  only  ;  (a)  that  for 
the  ordination  of  a  bishop  three  bishops  at 
least  are  necessary ;  (b)  that  the  right  of 
confirmation  rests  with  the  metropolitan. 

The  whole  subject  of  episcopal  elections  is 
treated  fully  by  Van  Espen  and  by  Thomas- 
sin,  in  Ancienne  et  Nouvelle  Discipline  de 
VJGglise,  P.  II.  1.  2. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Ganonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  I.  Dist. 
LXIV.  c.  j. 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


13 


CANON  V. 

Concerning  those,  whether  of  the  clergy  or  of  the  laity,  who  have  been  excommuni- 
cated in  the  several  provinces,  let  the  provision  of  the  canon  be  observed  by  the 
bishops  which  provides  that  persons  cast  out  by  some  be  not  readmitted  by  others. 
Nevertheless,  inquiry  should  be  made  whether  they  have  been  excommunicated  through 
captiousness,  or  contentiousness,  or  any  such  like  ungracious  disposition  in  the  bishop. 
And,  that  this  matter  may  have  due  investigation,  it  is  decreed  that  in  every  province 
synods  shall  be  held  twice  a  year,  in  order  that  when  all  the  bishops  of  the  province  are 
assembled  together,  such  questions  may  by  them  be  thoroughly  examined,  that  so  those 
who  have  confessedly  offended  against  their  bishop,  may  be  seen  by  all  to  be  for  just 
cause  excommunicated,  until  it  shall  seem  fit  to  a  general  meeting  of  the  bishops  to  pro- 
nounce a  milder  sentence  upon  them.  And  let  these  synods  be  held,  the  one  before 
Lent,  (that  the  pure  Gift  may  be  offered  to  God  after  all  bitterness  has  been  put  away), 
and  let  the  second  be  held  about  autumn. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  V. 


Such  as  have  been  excommunicated  by  certain 
bishops  shall  not  be  restored  by  others,  unless 
the  excommunication  ivas  the  result  of  pusil- 
lanimity, or  strife,  or  some  other  similar  cause. 
And  that  this  may  be  didy  attended  to,  there  shall 
be  in  each  year  two  synods  in  every  province — 
the  one  before  Lent,  the  other  toward  autumn. 

There  has  always  been  found  the  greatest 
difficulty  in  securing  the  regular  meetings  of 
provincial  and  diocesan  synods,  and  despite 
the  very  explicit  canonical  legislation  upon 
the  subject,  and  the  severe  penalties  attached 
to  those  not  answering  the  summons,  in  large 
parts  of  the  Church  for  centuries  these  coun- 
cils have  been  of  the  rarest  occurrence.  Zo- 
naras  complains  that  in  his  time  "  these  synods 
were  everywhere  treated  with  great  con- 
tempt," and  that  they  had  actually  ceased  to 
be  held. 

Possibly  the  opinion  of  St.  Gregory  Na- 
zianzen  had  grown  common,  for  it  will  be  re- 
membered that  in  refusing  to  go  to  the  lat- 
ter sessions  of  the  Second  Ecumenical  he 
wrote,  "  I  am  resolved  to  avoid  every  meeting 
of  bishops,  for  I  have  never  seen  any  synod 
end  well,  nor  assuage  rather  than  aggravate 
disorders."  l 


Hefele. 


Gelasius  has  given  in  his  history  of  the 
Council  of  Nice,  the  text  of  the  canons  passed 
by  the  Council ;  and  it  must  be  noticed  that 
there  is  here  a  slight  difference  between  his 
text  and  ours.  Our  reading  is  as  follows  : 
"The  excommunication  continues  to  be  in 
force  until  it  seem  good  to  the  assembly  of 
bishops  (70)  kolvw)  to  soften  it."  Gelasius,  on 
the  other  hand,  writes  :  /xe^pis  ov  t<3  Kowm  rj  t<3 
i-ma-KOTTM,  k.  t.  A.,  that  is  to  say,  "  until  it  seem 
good  to  the  assembly  of  bishops,  or  to  the 
bishop  (who  has  passed  the  sentence),"  etc. 
.  .  .  Dionysius  the  Less  has  also  followed 
this  variation,  as  his  translation  of  the  canon 
shows.  It  does  not  change  the  essential 
meaning  of  the  passage ;  for  it  may  be  well 
understood  that  the  bishop  who  has  passed 
the  sentence  of  excommunication  has  also  the 
right  to  mitigate  it.  But  the  variation  adopted 
by  the  Prisca  alters,  on  the  contrary,  the 
whole  sense  of  the  canon  :  the  Prisca  has  not 
to)  kolvw,  but  only  Zttio-kottu)  :  it  is  in  this  errone- 
ous form  that  the  canon  has  passed  into  the 
Corpus  jurisc  an. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 
XL,  Quggst.  III.,  Canon  lxxiij.,  and  the  latter 
part  in  Pars  I.,  Distinc.  XVIII.,  c.  iij. 


EXCURSUS  ON  THE  WORD  UPo<T<j>iPuv. 

(Dr.  Adolph  Harnack  :  Hist,  of  Dogma  [Eng.  Tr.]  Vol.  I.  p.  209.) 

The  idea  of  the  whole  transaction  of  the  Supper  as  a  sacrifice,  is  plainly  found  in  the  Di- 
dache,  (c.  14),  in  Ignatius,  and  above  all,  in  Justin  (I.  65f.)  But  even  Clement  of  Rome  pre- 
supposes it,  when  (in  cc.  40-44)  he  draws  a  parallel  between  bishops  and  deacons  and  the 

1  Greg.  Naz.  Ep.  ail  Procop. ;  Migne  Pat.  Grxc,  No.  cxxx. 


14 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


Priests  and  Levites  of  the  Old  Testament,  describing  as  the  chief  function  of  the  former 
(44.4)  irpoo-cjiepeiv  to  Siopa.  This  is  not  the  place  to  enquire  whether  the  first  celebration  had,  in 
the  mind  of  its  founder,  the  character  of  a  sacrificial  meal ;  but,  certainly,  the  idea,  as  it  was 
already  developed  at  the  time  of  Justin,  had  been  created  by  the  churches.  Various  reasons 
tended  towards  seeing  in  the  Supper  a  sacrifice.  In  the  first  place,  Malachi  i.  11,  demanded 
a  solemn  Christian  sacrifice :  see  my  notes  on  Didache,  14.3.  In  the  second  place,  all  prayers 
were  regarded  as  a  sacrifice,  and  therefore  the  solemn  prayers  at  the  Supper  must  be  specially 
considered  as  such.  In  the  third  place,  the  words  of  institution  tovto  Troieire,  contained  a  com- 
mand with  regard  to  a  definite  religious  action.  Such  an  action,  however,  could  only  be  rep- 
resented as  a  sacrifice,  and  this  the  more,  that  the  Gentile  Christians  might  suppose  that  they 
had  to  understand  ttoluv  in  the  sense  of  Ovuv.  In  the  fourth  place,  payments  in  kind  were 
necessary  for  the  "  agapa3  "  connected  with  the  Supper,  out  of  which  were  taken  the  bread 
and  wine  for  the  Holy  celebration  ;  in  what  other  aspect  could  these  offerings  in  the  worship 
be  regarded  than  as  -Kpoa^opal  f or  the  purpose  of  a  sacrifice?  Yet  the  spiritual  idea  so  pre- 
vailed that  only  the  prayers  were  regarded  as  the  Ovaia  proper,  even  in  the  case  of  Justin 
{Dial.  117).  The  elements  are  only  Swpa,  irpoafyopai,  which  obtain  their  value  from  the  prayers, 
in  which  thanks  are  given  for  the  gifts  of  creation  and  redemption,  as  well  as  for  the  holy 
meal,  and  entreaty  is  made  for  the  introduction  of  the  community  into  the  Kingdom  of  God 
(see  Didache,  9.  10).  Therefore,  even  the  sacred  meal  itself  is  called  evxapLaua  (Justin,  Apol. 
I.  6G :  y  tock/»/  avr-q  KoXzirai  Trap  {jpuv  eu^apwrTta.  Didache,  9.  1 :  Ignat.),  because  it  is  rpacfir) 
evxa.picrTr)6et<ja.  It  is  a  mistake  to  suppose  that  Justin  already  understood  the  body  of  Christ 
to  be  the  object  of  ttoluv,1  and  therefore  thought  of  a  sacrifice  of  this  body  (I.  66).  The  real 
sacrificial  act  in  the  Supper  consists  rather,  according  to  Justin,  only  in  the  evxapicniav  iroielv, 
whereby  the  kolvos  apro?  becomes  the  api-os  ri}?  euxapumas.2  The  sacrifice  of  the  Supper  in  its 
essence,  apart  from  the  offering  of  alms,  which  in  the  practice  of  the  Church  was  closely 
united  with  it,  is  nothing  but  a  sacrifice  of  prayer :  the  sacrificial  act  of  the  Christian  here 
also  is  nothing  else  than  an  act  of  prayer  (See  Apol.  I.  14,  65-67 ;  Dial.  28,  29,  41,  70, 
116-118). 

Harnack  (lib.  cit.  Vol.  II.  chapter  III.  p.  136)  says  that  "Cyprian  was  the  first  to  associ- 
ate the  specific  offering,  i.e.  the  Lord's  Supper  with  the  specific  priesthood.  Secondly,  he 
was  the  first  to  designate  the  passio  Domini,  nay,  the  sanguis  Christi  and  the  dominica  hostia 
as  the  object  of  the  eucharistic  offering."  In  a  foot-note  (on  the  same  page)  he  explains  that 
"  Sacrifieare,  Sacrificium  celebrare  in  all  passages  where  they  are  unaccompanied  by  any 
qualifying  words,  mean  to  celebrate  the  Lord's  Supper."  But  Harnack  is  confronted  by  the 
very  evident  objection  that  if  this  was  an  invention  of  St.  Cyprian's,  it  is  most  extraordinary 
that  it  raised  no  protest,  and  he  very  frankly  confesses  (note  2,  on  same  page)  that  "the 
transference  of  the  sacrificial  idea  to  the  consecrated  elements  which  in  all  probability  Cy- 
prian already  found  in  existence,  etc."  Harnack  further  on  (in  the  same  note  on  p.  137)  notes 
that  he  lias  pointed  out  in  his  notes  on  the  Didache  that  in  the  "  Apostolic  Church  Order  " 
occurs  the  expression  y  7rpo(rcf>opa  rov  crw/xaTos  «al  tot)  cu/xaTos. 


1  Harnack  seems  to  know  only  the  printed  (and  almost  certainly 
incorrect)  reading  of  the  modern  texts  of  the  I.  Apology  (Chap- 
ter LXVI)  where  toOto  eon  has  taken  the  place  of  TovTeori..    The 

passage  did  read,  tovto  7roi€iTe,  ei?  Ti)V  6.vay.vy\o-iv  jllov,  TOVTeo-Tt  to 
o-ujiKi  M<™  ;  in  which  it  is  evident  that  the  words  "my  body  "  are 
in  apposition  with  toCto  and  the  object  of  iroun-e,  which  has 
its  sacrificial  sense  "to  offer,"  as  in  the  Dialogue  with  Trypho, 
6  Kvpios  Yifxuiv  7Tape'oWe  noieiv  (chapter  xlj). 

2  Harnack  evidently  does  not  fully  appreciate  the  Catholic  doc- 
trine of  the  Sacrifice  in  the  Holy  Eucharist.    No  Catholic  theolo- 


gian teaches  that  the  essence  of  that  sacrifice  is  to  offer  up  the 
already  present  Body  of  Christ,  but  that  the  essence  of  the  Sacri- 
fice is  the  act  of  consecration;  the  "making  the  Eucharistic 
Sacrifice,"  as  he  accurately  says,  "whereby  the  common  bread 
becomes  the  Bread  of  the  Eucharist."  Harnack  says  truly  that 
"  the  sacrificial  act  of  the  Christian  here  also  is  nothing  else  than 
an  act  of  prayer,"  but  he  does  not  seem  to  know  that  this  is  the 
Catholic  doctrine  to-day,  nor  to  appreciate  at  its  Catholic  value  the 
"  Prayer  of  Consecration."  The  act  of  consecration  is  the  essence 
of  the  Christian  Sacrifice  according  to  the  teaching  of  all  Catholics. 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


15 


CANON  VI. 

Let  the  ancient  customs  in  Egypt,  Libya  and  Pentapolis  prevail,  that  the  Bishop 
of  Alexandria  have  jurisdiction  in  all  these,  since  the  like  is  customary  for  the  Bishop 
of  Koine  also.  Likewise  in  Antioch  and  the  other  provinces,  let  the  Churches  retain 
their  privileges.  And  this  is  to  be  universally  understood,  that  if  any  one  be  made 
bishop  without  the  consent  of  the  Metropolitan,  the  great  Synod  has  declared  that  such 
a  man  ought  not  to  be  a  bishop.  If,  however,  two  or  three  bishops  shall  from  natural 
love  of  contradiction,  oppose  the  common  suffrage  of  the  rest,  it  being  reasonable  and 
in  accordance  with  the  ecclesiastical  law,  then  let  the  choice  of  the  majority  prevail. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VI. 


The  Bishop  of  Alexandria  shall  have  juris- 
diction over  Egypt,  Libya,  and  Pentapolis.  As 
also  the  Roman  bishop  over  those  subject  to 
Borne.  So,  too,  the  Bishop  of  Antioch  and  the 
rest  over  those  who  are  under  them.  If  any  be 
a  bishop  contrary  to  the  judgment  of  the  Metro- 
politan, let  him  be  no  bishop.  Provided  it  be 
in  accordance  with  the  canons  by  the  suffrage  of 
the  majority,  if  three  object,  their  objection  shall 
be  of  no  force. 

Many,  probably  most,  commentators  have 
considered  this  the  most  important  and  most 
interesting  of  all  the  Niceue  canons,  and  a 
whole  library  of  works  has  been  written  upon 
it,  some  of  the  works  asserting  and  some  de- 
nying what  are  commonly  called  the  Papal 
claims.  If  any  one  wishes  to  see  a  list  of  the 
most  famous  of  these  works  he  will  find  it  in 
Phillips's  Eirchenrecht  (Bd.  ii.  S.  35).  I  shall 
reserve  what  I  have  to  say  upon  this  subject 
to  the  notes  on  a  canon  which  seems  really 
to  deal  with  it,  confining  myself  here  to  an 
elucidation  of  the  words  found  in  the  canon 
before  us. 

Hammond,  W.  A. 

The  object  and  intention  of  this  canon  seems 
clearly  to  have  been,  not  to  introduce  any  new 
powers  or  regulations  into  the  Church,  but  to 
confirm  and  establish  ancient  customs  already 
existing.  This,  indeed,  is  evident  from  the 
very  first  words  of  it :  "Let  the  ancient  cus- 
toms be  maintained."  It  appears  to  have  been 
made  with  particular  reference  to  the  case  of 
the  Church  of  Alexandria,  which  had  been 
troubled  by  the  irregular  proceedings  of  Mile- 
tius,  and  to  confirm  the  ancient  privileges  of 
that  see  which  he  had  invaded.  The  latter 
part  of  it,  however,  applies  to  all  Metropoli- 
tans, and  confirms  all  their  ancient  privileges. 

Ffoulkes. 
(Diet.  Christ.  Antiq.  voce  Council  of  Nicaea). 
The  first  half  of  the  canon  enacts  merely 
that  what  had  long  been  customary  with  re- 


spect to  such  persons  in  every  province  should 
become  law,  beginning  with  the  province 
where  this  principle  had  been  infringed ; 
while  the  second  half  declares  what  was  in 
future  to  be  received  as  law  on  two  points 
which  custom  had  not  as  yet  expressly  ruled. 
.  .  .  Nobody  disputes  the  meaning  of  this 
last  half  ;  nor,  in  fact,  would  the  meaning  of 
the  first  half  have  been  questioned,  had  it  not 
included  Rome.  .  .  .  Nobody  can  main- 
tain that  the  bishops  of  Antioch  and  Alexan- 
dria were  called  patriarchs  then,  or  that  the 
jurisdiction  they  had  then  was  co-extensive 
with  what  they  had  afterward,  when  they 
were  so  called.  .  .  .  It  is  on  this  clause 
["since  the  like  is  customary  for  the  Bishops 
of  Rome  also"]  standing  parenthetically  be- 
tween what  is  decreed  for  the  particular  cases 
of  Egypt  and  Antioch,  and  in  consequence  of 
the  interpretation  given  to  it  by  Rufinus, 
more  particularly,  that  so  much  strife  has  been 
raised.  Rufinus  may  rank  low  as  a  translator, 
yet,  being  a  native  of  Aquileia,  he  cannot  have 
been  ignorant  of  Roman  ways,  nor,  on  the 
other  hand,  had  he  greatly  misrepresented 
them,  would  his  version  have  waited  till  the 
seventeenth  century  to  be  impeached. 

Hepele. 
The  sense  of  the  first  words  of  the  canon  is 
as  follows  :  "  This  ancient  right  is  assigned  to 
the  Bishop  of  Alexandria  which  places  under 
his  jurisdiction  the  whole  diocese  of  Egypt." 
It  is  without  any  reason,  then,  that  the  French 
Protestant  Salmasius  (Saumaise),  the  Anglican 
Beveridge,  and  the  Gallican  Launoy,  try  to 
show  that  the  Council  of  Nice  granted  to  the 
Bishop  of  Alexandria  only  the  rights  of  ordi- 
nary metropolitans. 

Bishop  Stillingfleet. 
I  do  confess  there  was  something  peculiar 
in  the  case  of  the  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  for 
all  the  provinces  of  Egypt  were  under  his  im- 
mediate care,  which  was  Patriarchal  as  to  ex- 
tent, but  Metropolical  in  the  administration. 


16 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


JuSTELLUS. 

This  authority  (zijovo-ia)  is  that  of  a  Metro- 
politan which  the  Nicene  Fathers  decreed  to 
be  his  due  over  the  three  provinces  named  in 
this  canon,  Egypt,  Libya,  and  Pentapolis, 
which  made  up  the  whole  diocese  of  Egypt,  as 
well  in  matters  civil  as  ecclesiastical. 

On  this  important  question  Hefele  refers 
to  the  dissertation  of  Dupin,  in  his  work  Be 
Antiqua  Ecclesice  Bisciplina.  Hefele  says : 
"  It  seems  to  me  beyond  a  doubt  that  in  this 
canon  there  is  a  question  about  that  which 
was  afterward  called  the  patriarchate  of  the 
Bishop  of  Alexandria ;  that  is  to  say  that  he 
had  a  certain  recognized  ecclesiastical  author- 
ity, not  only  over  several  civil  provinces,  but 
also  over  several  ecclesiastical  provinces  (which 
had  their  own  metropolitans)  ;  "  and  further 
on  (p.  392)  he  adds  :  "  It  is  incontestable  that 
the  civil  provinces  of  Egypt,  Libya,  Pentapolis 
and  Thebai's,  which  were  all  in  subjection  to 


the  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  were  also  ecclesias- 
tical provinces  with  their  own  metropolitans ; 
and  consequently  it  is  not  the  ordinary  rights 
of  metropolitans  that  the  Sixth  Canon  of  Nice 
confers  on  the  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  but  the 
rights  of  a  superior  Metropolitan,  that  is,  of  a 
Patriarch." 

There  only  remains  to  see  what  were  the 
bounds  of  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Bishop  of 
Antioch.  The  civil  diocese  of  Oriens  is  shewn 
by  the  Second  Canon  of  Constantinople  to  be 
conterminous  with  what  was  afterward  called 
the  Patriarchate  of  Antioch.  The  see  of  An- 
tioch had,  as  we  know,  several  metropolitans 
subject  to  it,  among  them  Csesarea,  under 
whose  jurisdiction  was  Palestine.  Justellus, 
however,  is  of  opinion  that  Pope  Innocent  I. 
was  in  error  when  he  asserted  that  all  the 
Metropolitans  of  Oriens  were  to  be  ordained 
by  him  by  any  peculiar  authority,  and  goes 
so  far  as  to  stigmatize  his  words  as  "  contrary 
to  the  mind  of  the  Nicene  Synod."1 


EXCUKSUS  ON    THE  EXTENT  OF    THE  JURISDICTION   OF  THE    BISHOP  OF 
ROME   OVER  THE  SUBURBICAN   CHURCHES. 

Although,  as  Hefele  well  says,  "  It  is  evident  that  the  Council  has  not  in  view  here  the 
primacy  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome  over  the  whole  Church,  but  simply  his  power  as  a  patriarch," 
yet  it  may  not  be  unimportant  to  consider  what  his  patriarchal  limits  may  have  been, 

(Hefele,  Hist.  Councils,  Vol.  I.,  p.  397.) 
The  translation  of  this  [VI.]  canon  by  Rufinus  has  been  especially  an  apple  of  discord. 
Et  ut  apud  Alexandriam  et  in  urbe  Roma  vetusta  consuetudo  servetur,  ut  vel  ille  Egypti  vel  hie 
suburbicariarum  ecclesiarum  sollicitudinem  gerat.  In  the  seventeenth  century  this  sentence 
of  Rufinus  gave  rise  to  a  very  lively  discussion  between  the  celebrated  jurist,  Jacob  Goth- 
fried  (Gothofredus),  and  his  friend,  Salmasius,  on  one  side,  and  the  Jesuit,  Sirmond,  on  the 
other.  The  great  prefecture  of  Italy,  which  contained  about  a  third  of  the  whole  Roman 
Empire,  was  divided  into  four  vicariates,  among  which  the  vicariate  of  Rome  was  the  first. 
At  its  head  were  two  officers,  the prcefectus  urbi  and  the  viearius  urbis.  The  prcefectus  urbi 
exercised  authority  over  the  city  of  Rome,  and  further  in  a  suburban  circle  as  far  as  the  hun- 
dredth milestone.  The  boundary  of  the  viearius  urbis  comprised  ten  provinces — Campania, 
Tuscia  with  Ombria,  Picenum,  Valeria,  Samnium,  Apulia  with  Calabria,  Lucania  and  that  of 
the  Brutii,  Sicily,  Sardinia,  and  Corsica.  Gothfried  and  Salmasius  maintained,  that  by  the 
regiones  suburbicarice  the  little  territory  of  the  prcefectus  urbi  must  be  understood  ;  while, 
according  to  Sirmond,  these  words  designate  the  whole  territory  of  the  viearius  urbis.  In 
our  time  Dr.  Maasen  has  proved  in  his  book,2  already  quoted  several  times,  that  Gothfried  and 
Salmasius  were  right  in  maintaining  that,  by  the  regiones  suburbicarice,  the  little  territory  of 
the  prcefectus  urbi  must  be  alone  understood. 

Hefele  thinks  that  Phillips  "  has  proved  "  that  the  Bishop  of  Rome  had  patriarchal  rights 
over  places  outside  the  limits  of  the  ten  provinces  of  the  viearius  urbis ;  but  does  not  agree 

i  Contra  mentem  Synodi  Nicceni.  I  goes  on  to  express  the  opinion  that  the  patriarchal  power  of  Rome 

2  Friedrich  Maasen :  Der  Primal  des  Bischofs  von  Rom,  und    was  much  larger. 
die  alten  Patriarchalkirchen.    Bonn,  1S53.    §  100-110.    Maasen  | 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


17 


with  Phillips  in  thinking  Rufinus  in  error.  As  a  matter  of  fact  the  point  is  a  difficult  one, 
anil  has  little  to  do  with  the  gist  of  the  meaning  of  the  canon.  One  thing  is  certain  :  the 
early  Latin  version  of  the  canons,  called  the  Prisca,  was  not  satisfied  with  the  Greek  wording 
and  made  the  Canon  read  thus  :  "  It  is  of  ancient  custom  that  the  bishop  of  the  city  of 
Rome  should  have  a  primacy  (principatum),  so  that  he  should  govern  with  care  the  suburbi- 
can  places,  and  all  his  own  peovince."  1  Another  interesting  reading  is  that  found  in  several 
MSS.  which  begins,  "  The  Church  of  Rome  hath  always  had  a  primacy  (primatum),"  and  as  a 
matter  of  fact  the  early  date  of  this  addition  is  evinced  by  the  fact  that  the  canon  was 
actually  quoted  in  this  shape  by  Paschasinus  at  the  Council  of  Chalcedon. 

Hefele  further  on  says,  "  The  Greek  commentators  Zonaras  and  Balsamon  (of  the  twelfth 
century)  say  very  explicitly,  in  their  explanation  of  the  Canons  of  Nice,  that  this  sixth  canon 
confirms  the  rights  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome  as  patriarch  over  the  whole  West,"  and  refers  to 
Beveridge's  Syodicon,  Tom.  I.,  pp.  66  and  67.  After  diligent  search  I  can  find  nothing  to 
warrant  the  great  amplitude  of  this  statement.  Balsamon's  interpretation  is  very  vague, 
being  simply  that  the  Bishop  of  Rome  is  over  the  Western  Eparchies  (twv  etnrepiwv  i-rrdp^wv) 
and  Zonaras  still  more  vaguely  says  that  twv  kvirepiwv  dpxeiv  4'^os  iKparrjae.  That  the  whole 
West  was  in  a  general  way  understood  to  be  in  the  Roman  Patriarchate  I  have  no  doubt, 
that  the  Greek  scholiasts  just  quoted  deemed  it  to  be  so  I  think  most  probably  the  case,  but 
it  does  not  seem  to  me  that  they  have  said  so  in  the  particular  place  cited.  It  seems  to  me 
that  all  they  meant  to  say  was  that  the  custom  observed  at  Alexandria  and  Antioch  was  no 
purely  Eastern  and  local  thing,  for  a  similar  state  of  affairs  was  found  in  the  West. 


CANON  VII. 

Since  custom  and  ancient  tradition  have  prevailed  that  the  Bishop  of  iElia  [i.e., 
Jerusalem]  should  be  honoured,  let  him,  saving  its  due  dignity  to  the  Metropolis,  have 
the  next  place  of  honour. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VII. 
Let   the  Bishop   of  JElia  be  honoured,  the 
rights  of  the  Metropolis  being  preserved  intact. 

There  would  seem  to  be  a  singular  fitness 
in  the  Holy  City  Jerusalem  holding  a  very  ex- 
alted position  among  the  sees  of  Christendom, 
and  it  may  appear  astonishing  that  in  the  ear- 
liest times  it  was  only  a  suffragan  see  to  the 
great  Church  of  Caesarea.  It  must  be  re- 
membered, however,  that  only  about  seventy 
years  after  our  Lord's  death  the  city  of  Jeru- 
salem was  entirely  destroyed  and  ploughed  as 
a  field  according  to  the  prophet.  As  a  holy 
city  Jerusalem  was  a  thing  of  the  past  for 
long  years,  and  it  is  only  in  the  beginning  of 
the  second  century  that  we  find  a  strong 
Christian  Church  growing  up  in  the  rapidly 
increasing  city,  called  no  longer  Jerusalem, 
but  JElia  Capitolina.     Possibly  by  the  end  of 


1  Vide  Labbe's  Observation.    Tom.  II.,  col.  47. 


the  second  century  the  idea  of  the  holiness  of 
the  site  began  to  lend  dignity  to  the  occupant 
of  the  see  ;  at  all  events  Eusebius 2  tells  us 
that  "  at  a  synod  held  on  the  subject  of  the 
Easter  controversy  in  the  time  of  Pope  Victor, 
Theophilus  of  Csesarea  and  Narcissus  of  Jeru- 
salem were  presidents." 

It  was  this  feeling  of  reverence  which  in- 
duced the  passing  of  this  seventh  canon.  It 
is  very  hard  to  determine  just  what  was  the 
"precedence  "  granted  to  the  Bishop  of  iElia, 
nor  is  it  clear  which  is  the  metropolis  referred 
to  in  the  last  clause.  Most  writers,  including 
Hefele,  Balsamon,  Aristenus  and  Beveridge 
consider  it  to  be  Csesarea  ;  while  Zonaras 
thinks  Jerusalem  to  be  intended,  a  view  re- 
cently adopted  and  defended  by  Fuchs  ; 3 
others  again  suppose  it  is  Antioch  that  is  re- 
ferred to. 


2  Eusebius  :  Hist.  Eccl.    Lib.  v.,  c.  23. 

3  Fuchs  :  Bib.  der  Kirchenversammlungen.    Bd.  i.,  9.  399. 


VOL.  XIV. 


18  I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


\     EXCURSUS  ON  THE  RISE  OF  THE  PATRIARCHATE  OF  JERUSALEM.      • 

The  narrative  of  the  successive  steps  by  -which  the  See  of  Jerusalem  rose  from  being 
nothing  but  .ZElia,  a  Gentile  city,  into  one  of  the  five  patriarchal  sees  is  sad  reading  for  a 
Christian.  It  is  but  the  record  of  ambition  and,  "worse  still,  of  knavery.  No  Christian  can 
for  a  moment  grudge  to  the  Holy  City  of  the  old  dispensation  the  honour  shewn  it  by  the 
Church,  but  he  may  well  wish  that  the  honour  had  been  otherwise  obtained.  A  careful  study 
of  such  records  as  we  possess  shews  that  until  the  fifth  century  the  Metropolitan  of  Coesarea 
as  often  took  precedence  of  the  Bishop  of  Jerusalem  as  vice  versa,  and  Beveridge  has  taken 
great  pains  to  shew  that  the  learned  De  Marca  is  in  error  in  supposing  that  the  Council  of 
Nice  assigned  to  Jerusalem  a  dignity  superior  to  Csesarea,  and  only  inferior  to  Rome,  Alex- 
andria, and  Antioch.  It  is  true  that  in  the  signatures  the  Bishop  of  Jerusalem  does  sign 
before  his  metropolitan,  but  to  this  Beveridge  justly  replies  that  the  same  is  the  case  with  the 
occupants  of  two  other  of  his  suffragan  sees.  Bishop  Beveridge's  opinion  is  that  the  Council 
assigned  Jerusalem  the  second  place  in  the  province,  such  as  London  enjoys  in  the  Province 
of  Canterbury.  This,  however,  would  seem  to  be  as  much  too  little  as  De  Marca's  contention 
grants  too  much.  It  is  certain  that  almost  immediately  after  the  Council  had  adjourned, 
the  Bishop  of  Jerusalem,  Maxhnus,  convoked  a  synod  of  Palestine,  without  any  reference  to 
Caesarea,  which  consecrated  bishops  and  acquitted  St.  Athanasius.  It  is  true  that  he  was 
reprimanded  for  doing  so,1  but  yet  it  clearly  shews  how  he  intended  to  understand  the 
action  of  Nice.  The  matter  was  not  decided  for  a  century  more,  and  then  through  the  chi- 
canery of  Juvenal  the  bishop  of  Jerusalem. 

(Canon  Venables,  Diet.  Christ.  Biography.) 
Juvenalis  succeeded  Praylius  as  bishop  of  Jerusalem  somewhere  about  420  a.d.  The  exact 
year  cannot  be  determined.  The  episcopate  of  Praylius,  which  commenced  in  417  a.d.,  was 
but  short,  and  we  can  hardly  give  it  at  most  more  than  three  years.  The  statement  of  Cyril 
of  Scythopolis,  in  his  Life  of  St.  Euthymius  (c.  96),  that  Juvenal  died  "in  the  forty-fourth 
year  of  his  episcopate,"  458  a.d.,  is  certainly  incorrect,  as  it  would  make  his  episcopate  begin 
in  414  a.d.,  three  years  before  that  of  his  predecessor.  Juvenal  occupies  a  prominent  posi- 
tion during  the  Nestorian  and  Eutychian  troubles  towards  the  middle  of  the  fifth  century. 
But  the  part  played  by  him  at  the  councils  of  Ephesus  and  Chalcedon,  as  well  as  at  the  dis- 
graceful Xrja-TpiKr]  o-woSos  of  449,  was  more  conspicuous  than  creditable,  and  there  are  few  of 
the  actors  in  these  turbulent  and  saddening  scenes  who  leave  a  more  unpleasing  impression. 
The  ruling  object  of  Juvenal's  episcopate,  to  which  everything  else  was  secondary,  and  which 
guided  all  his  conduct,  was  the  elevation  of  the  see  of  Jerusalem  from  the  subordinate  posi- 
tion it  held  in  accordance  with  the  seventh  of  the  canons  of  the  council  of  Nicsea,  as  suffragan 
to  the  metropolitan  see  of  Ceesarea,  to  a  primary  place  in  the  episcopate.  Not  content  with 
aspiring  to  metropolitan  rank,  Juvenal  coveted  patriarchal  dignity,  and,  in  defiance  of  all 
canonical  authority,  he  claimed  jurisdiction  over  the  great  see  of  Antioch,  from  which  he 
sought  to  remove  Arabia  and  the  two  Phcenicias  to  his  own  province.  At  the  council  of 
Ephesus,  in  431,  he  asserted  for  "  the  apostolic  see  of  Jerusalem  the  same  rank  and  author- 
ity with  the  apostolic  see  of  Rome  "  (Labbe,  Condi,  iii.  642).  These  falsehoods  he  did  not 
scruple  to  support  with  forged  documents  ("  insolenter  ausus  per  commentitia  scripta  fir- 
mare,"  Leo.~'Mag.  Ep.  119  [92]),  and  other  disgraceful  artifices.  Scarcely  had  Juvenal  been 
consecrated  bishop  of  Jerusalem  when  he  proceeded  to  assert  his  claims  to  the  metropolitan 
rank  by  his  acts.     In  the  letter  of  remonstrance  against  the  proceedings  of  the  council  of 

1  Socrates :  Hist  Eccl.,  ii.  24. 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325  19 


Epliesus,  sent  to  Theodosius  by  the  Oriental  party,  they  complain  that  Juvenal,  whose 
"  ambitious  designs  and  juggling  tricks  "  they  are  only  too  well  acquainted  with,  had  or- 
dained in  provinces  over  which  he  had  no  jurisdiction  (Labbe,  Condi,  iii.  728).  This  auda- 
cious attempt  to  set  at  nought  the  Nicene  decrees,  and  to  falsify  both  history  and  tradition 
was  regarded  with  the  utmost  indignation  by  the  leaders  of  the  Christian  church.  Cyril  of 
Alexandria  shuddered  at  the  impious  design  ("merito  perhorrescens,"  Leo.  u.  s.),  and  wrote 
to  Leo,  then  archdeacon  of  Borne,  informing  him  of  what  Juvenal  was  undertaking,  and  beg- 
ging that  his  unlawful  attempts  might  have  no  sanction  from  the  apostolic  See  ("  ut  nulla 
illicitis  conatibus  preeberetur  assensio,"  it.  s.).  Juvenal,  however,  was  far  too  useful  an  ally  in 
his  campaign  against  Nestorius  for  Cyril  lightly  to  discard.  When  the  council  met  at  Ephe- 
sus  Juvenal  was  allowed,  without  the  slightest  remonstrance,  to  take  precedence  of  his  met- 
ropolitan of  Caesarea,  and  to  occupy  the  position  of  vice-president  of  the  council,  coming 
next  after  Cyril  himself  (Labbe,  Concil.  iii.  445),  and  was  regarded  in  all  respects  as  the 
second  prelate  in  the  assembly.  The  arrogant  assertion  of  his  supremacy  over  the  bishop 
of  Antioch,  and  his  claim  to  take  rank  next  after  Rome  as  an  apostolical  see,  provoked  no 
open  remonstrance,  and  his  pretensions  were  at  least  tacitly  allowed.  At  the  next  council, 
the  disgraceful  Latrocinium,  Juvenal  occupied  the  third  place,  after  Dioscorus  and  the  papal 
legate,  having  been  specially  named  by  Theodosius,  together  with  Thalassius  of  Ceesarea 
(who  appears  to  have  taken  no  umbrage  at  his  suffragan  being  preferred  before  him),  as  next 
in  authority  to  Dioscorus  (Labbe,  Concil.  iv.  109),  and  he  took  a  leading  part  in  the  violent 
proceedings  of  that  assembly.  When  the  council  of  Chalcedon  met,  one  of  the  matters 
which  came  before  it  for  settlement  was  the  dispute  as  to  priority  between  Juvenal  and 
Maximus  Bishop  of  Antioch.  The  contention  was  long  and  severe.  It  ended  in  a  compro- 
mise agreed  on  in  the  Seventh  Action,  ju.£t<x  -n-oXXrjv  <£<Aoveuaai/.  Juvenal  surrendered  his  claim 
to  the  two  Phoenicias  and  to  Arabia,  on  condition  of  his  being  allowed  metropolitical  juris- 
diction over  the  three  Palestines  (Labbe,  Concil.  iv.  613).  The  claim  to  patriarchal  author- 
ity over  the  Bishop  of  Antioch  put  forward  at  Ephesus  was  discreetly  dropped.  The  diffi- 
culty presented  by  the  Nicene  canon  does  not  appear  to  have  presented  itself  to  the  council, 
nor  was  any  one  found  to  urge  the  undoubted  claims  of  the  see  of  Csesarea.  The  terms 
arranged  between  Maximus  and  Juvenal  were  regarded  as  satisfactory,  and  received  the  con- 
sent of  the  assembled  bishops  (ibid.  618).  Maximus,  however,  was  not  long  in  repenting  of 
his  too  ready  acquiescence  in  Juvenal's  demands,  and  wrote  a  letter  of  complaint  to  pope 
Leo,  who  replied  by  the  letter  which  has  been  already  quoted,  dated  June  11,  453  a.d.,  in 
which  he  upheld  the  binding  authority  of  the  Nicene  canons,  and  commenting  in  the  strong- 
est terms  on  the  greediness  and  ambition  of  Juvenal,  who  allowed  no  opportunity  of  forward- 
ing his  ends  to  be  lost,  declared  that  as  far  as  he  was  concerned  he  would  do  all  he  could  to 
maintain  the  ancient  dignity  of  the  see  of  Antioch  (Leo  Magn.  Ep.  ad  Maximum,  119  [92]). 
No  further  action,  however,  seems  to  have  been  taken  either  by  Leo  or  by  Maximus.  Juve- 
nal was  left  master  of  the  situation,  and  the  church  of  Jerusalem  has  from  that  epoch  peace- 
ably enjoyed  the  patriarchal  dignity  obtained  for  it  by  such  base  means. 


CANON  VIII. 

Conceening  those  who  call  themselves  Cathari,  if  they  come  over  to  the  Catholic  and 
Apostolic  Church,  the  great  and  holy  Synod  decrees  that  they  who  are  ordained  shall 
continue  as  they  are  in  the  clergy.  But  it  is  before  all  things  necessary  that  they  should 
profess  in  writing  that  they  will  observe  and  follow  the  dogmas  of  the  Catholic  and  Apos- 
tolic Church ;  in  particular  that  they  will  communicate  with  persons  who  have  been 
twice  married,  and  with  those  who  having  lapsed  in  persecution  have  had  a  period  [of 

C  2 


20 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


penance]  laid  upon  them,  and  a  time  [of  restoration]  fixed  so  that  in  all  things  they  will 
follow  the  dogmas  of  the  Catholic  Church.  Wheresoever,  then,  whether  in  villages  or  in 
cities,  all  of  the  ordained  are  found  to  be  of  these  only,  let  them  remain  in  the  clergy,  and 
in  the  same  rank  in  which  they  are  found.  But  if  they  come  over  where  there  is  a  bishop 
or  presbyter  of  the  Catholic  Church,  it  is  manifest  that  the  Bishop  of  the  Church  must 
have  the  bishop's  dignity ;  and  he  who  was  named  bishop  by  those  who  are  called  Cathari 
shall  have  the  rank  of  presbyter,  unless  it  shall  seem  fit  to  the  Bishop  to  admit  him  to 
partake  in  the  honour  of  the  title.  Or,  if  this  should  not  be  satisfactory,  then  shall  the 
bishop  provide  for  him  a  place  as  Chorepiscopus,  or  presbyter,  in  order  that  he  may  be 
evidently  seen  to  be  of  the  clergy,  and  that  there  may  not  be  two  bishops  in  the  city. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VIII. 


If  those  called  Cathari  come  over,  let  them 
first  make  profession  that  they  are  willing  to 
communicate  with  the  tivice  married,  and  to 
grant  pardon  to  the  lapsed.  And  on  this  con- 
dition he  who  happens  to  be  in  orders,  shall 
continue  in  the  same  order,  so  that  a  bishop 
shall  still  be  bishop.  Whoever  was  a  bishop 
among  the  Cathari  let  him,  however,  become  a 
Chorepiscopus,  or  let  him  enjoy  the  honour  of  a 
presbyter  or  of  a  bishop.  For  in  one  church  there 
shall  not  be  two  bishops. 

The  Cathari  or  Novatians  were  the  follow- 
ers of  Novatian,  a  presbyter  of  Rome,  who  had 
been  a  Stoic  philosopher  and  was  delivered, 
according  to  his  own  story,  from  diabolical 
possession  at  his  exorcising  by  the  Church 
before  his  baptism,  when  becoming  a  Cate- 
chumen. Being  in  peril  of  death  by  illness 
he  received  clinical  baptism,  and  was  ordained 
priest  without  any  further  sacred  rites  being 
administered  to  him.  During  the  persecution 
he  constantly  refused  to  assist  his  brethren, 
and  afterwards  raised  his  voice  against  what 
he  considered  their  culpable  laxity  in  admit- 
ting to  penance  the  lapsed.  Many  agreed  with 
him  in  this,  especially  of  the  clergy,  and  event- 
ually, in  a.d.  251,  he  induced  three  bishops  to 
consecrate  him,  thus  becoming,  as  Fleury  re- 
marks,1 "  the  first  Anti-Pope."  His  indigna- 
tion was  principally  spent  upon  Pope  Corne- 
lius, and  to  overthrow  the  prevailing  discipline 
of  the  Church  he  ordained  bishops  and  sent 
them  to  different  parts  of  the  empire  as  the 
disseminators  of  his  error.  It  is  well  to  re- 
member that  while  beginning  only  as  a  schis- 
matic, he  soon  fell  into  heresy,  denying  that 
the  Church  had  the  power  to  absolve  the  lapsed. 
Although  condemned  by  several  councils  his 
sect  continued  on,  and  like  the  Montanists 
they  rebaptized  Catholics  who  apostatized  to 
them,  and  absolutely  rejected  all  second  mar- 
riages.    At  the  time  of  the  Council  of  Nice 

'  Fleury,  Hist.  Eccles,  ljy.  VI.,  liij. 


the  Novatian  bishop  at  Constantinople,  Ace- 
sius,  was  greatly  esteemed,  and  although  a 
schismatic,  was  invited  to  attend  the  council. 
After  having  in  answer  to  the  emperor's  en- 
quiry whether  he  was  willing  to  sign  the 
Creed,  assured  him  that  he  was,  he  went  on 
to  explain  that  his  separation  was  because 
the  Church  no  longer  observed  the  ancient 
discipline  which  forbade  that  those  who  had 
committed  mortal  sin  should  ever  be  read- 
mitted to  communion.  According  to  the  No- 
vatians he  might  be  exhorted  to  repentance, 
but  the  Church  had  no  power  to  assure  him 
of  forgiveness  but  must  leave  him  to  the  judg- 
ment of  God.  It  was  then  that  Constantine 
said,  "Acesius,  take  a  ladder,  and  climb  up 
to  heaven  alone." - 

Aristentjs. 
If  any  of  them  be  bishops  or  chorepiscopi 
they  shall  remain  in  the  same  rank,  unless 
perchance  in  the  same  city  there  be  found  a 
bishop  of  the  Catholic  Church,  ordained  be- 
fore their  coming.  For  in  this  case  he  that 
was  properly  bishop  from  the  first  shall  have 
the  preference,  and  he  alone  shall  retain  the 
Episcopal  throne.  For  it  is  not  right  that  in 
the  same  city  there  should  be  two  bishops. 
But  he  who  by  the  Cathari  was  called  bishop, 
shall  be  honoured  as  a  presbyter,  or  (if  it  so 
please  the  bishop),  he  shall  be  sharer  of  the 
title  bishop ;  but  he  shall  exercise  no  epis- 
copal jurisdiction. 

Zonaras,  Balsamon,  Beveridge  and  Van  Es- 
pen,  are  of  opinion  that  xeipo^erou/xevous  does 
not  mean  that  they  are  to  receive  a  new  laying 
on  of  hands  at  their  reception  into  the  Church, 
but  that  it  refers  to  their  already  condition  of 
being  ordained,  the  meaning  being  that  as 
they  have  had  Novatian  ordination  they  must 
be  reckoned  among  the  clergy.  Dionysius 
Exiguus  takes  a  different  view,  as  does  also 
the  Prisca  version,  according  to  which  the 


-  Socrates,  Hist.  Eccl,  i.  10.     Vide  also  Tillemont,  Mimoires, 
etc.,  torn,  vi.,  art.  17,  and  Sozoman,  H.  E.  i,  22. 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


21 


clergy  of  the  Novatians  were  to  receive  a  lay- 
ing on  of  hands,  x^po^ou/xe'vous,  but  that  it 
was  not  to  be  a  reordination.  With  this  in- 
terpretation Hefele  seems  to  agree,  founding 


his  opinion  upon  the  fact  that  the  article  is 
wanting  before  x«po#eToi;/xevovs,  and  that  airous 
is  added.  Gratian  *  supposes  that  this  eighth 
canon  orders  a  re-ordination. 


EXCURSUS  ON  THE  CHOREPISCOPI. 

There  has  been  much  difference  of  opinion  among  the  learned  touching  the  status  of  the 
Chorepiscopus  in  the  early  Church.  The  main  question  in  dispute  is  as  to  whether  they 
were  always,  sometimes,  or  never,  in  episcopal  orders.  Most  Anglican  writers,  including 
Beveridge,  Hammond,  Cave,  and  Routh,  have  affirmed  the  first  proposition,  that  they  were 
true  bishops,  but  that,  out  of  respect  to  the  bishop  of  the  City  they  were  forbidden  the  exer- 
cise of  certain  of  their  episcopal  functions,  except  upon  extraordinary  occasions.  With  this 
view  Binterim 2  also  agrees,  and  Augusti  is  of  the  same  opinion.3  But  Thomassinus  is  of  a 
different  mind,  thinking,  so  says  Hefele,4  that  there  were  "  two  classes  of  chorepiscopi,  of 
whom  the  one  were  real  bishops,  while  the  other  had  only  the  title  without  consecration." 

The  third  opinion,  that  they  were  merely  presbyters,  is  espoused  by  Morinus  and  Du 
Cange,  and  others  who  are  named  by  Bingham.5  This  last  opinion  is  now  all  but  univer- 
sally rejected,  to  the  other  two  we  shall  now  devote  our  attention. 

For  the  first  opinion  no  one  can  speak  more  learnedly  nor  more  authoritatively  than 
Arthur  West  Haddon,  who  writes  as  follows  ; 

(Haddon,  Diet.  Christ.  Antiq.  s.  v.  Chorepiscopus.) 
The  chorepiscopus  was  called  into  existence  in  the  latter  part  of  the  third  century,  and 
first  in  Asia  Minor,  in  order  to  meet  the  want  of  episcopal  supervision  in  the  country  parts  of 
the  now  enlarged  dioceses  without  subdivision.  [They  are]  first  mentioned  in  the  Councils 
of  Ancyra  and  Neo-Csesarea  a.  d.  314,  and  again  in  the  Council  of  Nice  (which  is  subscribed 
by  fifteen,  all  from  Asia  Minor  or  Syria).  [They  became]  sufficiently  important  to  require  re- 
striction by  the  time  of  the  Council  of  Antioch,  a.  d.  341  ;  and  continued  to  exist  in  the 
East  until  at  least  the  ninth  century,  when  they  were  supplanted  by  egapxoi.  [Chorepiscopi 
are]  first  mentioned  in  the  West  in  the  Council  of  Riez,  a.  d.  439  (the  Epistles  of  Pope  Da- 
masus  I.  and  of  Leo.  M.  respecting  them  being  forgeries),  and  continued  there  (but  not  in 
Africa,  principally  in  France)  until  about  the  tenth  century,  after  which  the  name  occurs  (in 
a  decree  of  Pope  Damasus  II.  ap.  Sigeb.  in  an.  1048)  as  equivalent  to  archdeacon,  an  office 
from  which  the  Arabic  Nicene  canons  expressly  distinguish  it.  The  functions  of  chorepis- 
copi, as  well  as  their  name,  were  of  an  episcopal,  not  of  a  presbyterial  kind,  although  limited 
to  minor  offices.  They  overlooked  the  country  district  committed  to  them,  "loco  episcopi," 
ordaining  readers,  exorcists,  subdeacons,  but,  as  a  rule,  not  deacons  or  presbyters  (and  of 
course  not  bishops),  unless  by  express  permission  of  their  diocesan  bishop.  They  confirmed 
in  their  own  districts,  and  (in  Gaul)  are  mentioned  as  consecrating  churches  (vide  Du  Cange). 
They  granted  elpeviKal,  or  letters  dimissory,  which  country  presbyters  were  forbidden  to  do. 
They  had  also  the  honorary  privilege  (n/xaj/xevoi)  of  assisting  at  the  celebration  of  the  Holy 
Eucharist  in  the  mother  city  church,  which  country  presbyters  had  not  (Cone.  Ancyr.  can. 
xiii.;  Neo-Ccesar.  can.  xiv.  ;  Antioch,  can.  x.  ;  St.  Basil  M.  Epist.  181  ;  Rab.  Maur.  De  Instit. 
Cler.  i.  5,  etc.  etc.).  They  were  held  therefore  to  have  power  of  ordination,  but  to  lack  juris- 
diction, save  subordinately.  And  the  actual  ordination  of  a  presbyter  by  Timotheus,  a  chor- 
episcopus, is  recorded  (Pallad.,  Hist.  Lausiac.  106). 


1  Gratian,  Decretum,  Corp.  Juris  Canon,  Pars.  II.  Causa  I. 
Qusest.  7,  Can.  viij. 
3  Binterim,  Denkwilrdigkeiten,  vol.  i.  part  ii.  pp.  386-414. 


3  Augusti,  Denkwilrdigkeiten,  vol.  xi.  p.  159  et  seqq. 

4  Hefele,  Hist,  of  the  Councils,  vol.  ii.  p.  322. 
"Bingham,  Antiquities,  ii.  xiv.  2,  3. 


22  I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


In  the  West,  i.e.  chiefly  in  Gaul,  the  order  appears  to  have  prevailed  more  widely,  to  have 
usurped  episcopal  functions  without  due  subordination  to  the  diocesans,  and  to  have  been 
also  taken  advantage  of  by  idle  or  worldly  diocesans.  In  consequence  it  seems  to  have 
aroused  a  strong  feeling  of  hostility,  which  showed  itself,  first  in  a  series  of  papal  bulls,  con- 
demning them  ;  headed,  it  is  true,  by  two  forged  letters  respectively  of  Damasus  I.  and  Leo. 
M.  (of  which  the  latter  is  merely  an  interpolated  version  of  Cone.  Hispal.  II.  a.d.  619,  can. 
7,  adding  chorepiscopi  to  presbyteri,  of  which  latter  the  council  really  treats),  but  continuing 
in  a  more  genuine  form,  from  Leo  III.  down  to  Pope  Nicholas  I.  (to  Rodolph,  Archbishop  of 
Bourges,  a.d.  864) ;  the  last  of  whom,  however,  takes  the  more  moderate  line  of  affirming 
chorepiscopi  to  be  really  bishops,  and  consequently  refusing  to  annul  their  ordinations  of 
presbyters  and  deacons  (as  previous  popes  had  done),  but  orders  them  to  keep  within  canoni- 
cal limits  ;  and  secondly,  in  a  series  of  conciliar  decrees,  Gone.  Ratispon.  a.d.  800,  in  Capit. 
lib.  iv.  c.  1,  Pan's,  a.d.  829,  lib.  i.  c.  27  ;  Meld.  a.d.  845,  can.  44 ;  Metens.  a.d.  888,  can.  8,  and 
Capitul.  v.  168,  vi.  119,  vii.  187,  310,  323,  324,  annulling  all  episcopal  acts  of  chorepiscopi, 
and  ordering  them  to  be  repeated  by  "  true  "  bishops  ;  and  finally  forbidding  all  further 
appointments  of  chorepiscopi  at  all. 

That  chorepiscopi  as  such — i.e.  omitting  the  cases  of  reconciled  or  vacant  bishops  above 
mentioned,  of  whose  episcopate  of  course  no  question  is  made — were  at  first  truly  bishops 
both  in  East  and  West,  appears  almost  certain,  both  from  their  name  and  functions,  and 
even  from  the  arguments  of  their  strong  opponents  just  spoken  of.  If  nothing  more  could 
be  urged  against  them,  than  that  the  Council  of  Neo-Cassarea  compared  them  to  the  Seventy 
disciples,  that  the  Council  of  Antioch  authorises  their  consecration  by  a  single  bishop,  and 
that  they  actually  were  so  consecrated  (the  Antiochene  decree  might  mean  merely  nomina- 
tion by  the  word  yiveo-Sai,  but  the  actual  history  seems  to  rule  the  term  to  intend  consecra- 
tion, and  the  [one]  exceptional  case  of  a  chorepiscopus  recorded  [Actt.  Episc.  Cenoman.  ap. 
Du  Cange]  in  late  times  to  have  been  ordained  by  three  bishops  [in  order  that  he  might  be  a 
full  bishop]  merely  proves  the  general  rule  to  the  contrary) — and  that  they  were  consecrated 
for  "villages,"  contrary  to  canon, — then  they  certainly  were  bishops.  And  Pope  Nicholas 
expressly  says  that  they  were  so.  Undoubtedly  they  ceased  to  be  so  in  the  East,  and  were 
practically  merged  in  archdeacons  in  the  West. 

For  the  second  opinion,  its  great  champion,  Thomassinus  shall  speak. 

(Thomassin,  Ancienne  et  Nouvelle  Discipline  de  VEglise,  Tom.  I.  Livre  II.  chap  1.  §  iii.) 

The  chorepiscopi  were  not  duly  consecrated  bishops,  unless  some  bishop  had  consecrated 
a  bishop  for  a  town  and  the  bishop  thus  ordained  contrary  to  the  canons  was  tolerated  on 
condition  of  his  submitting  himself  to  the  diocesan  as  though  he  were  only  a  chorepiscopus. 
This  may  be  gathered  from  the  fifty-seventh  canon  of  Laodicea. 

From  this  canon  two  conclusions  may  be  drawn,  1st.  That  bishops  ought  not  to  be  or- 
dained for  villages,  and  that  as  Chorepiscopi  could  only  be  placed  in  villages  they  could  not 
be  bishops.  2d.  That  sometimes  by  accident  a  chorepiscopus  might  be  a  bishop,  but  only 
through  having  been  canonically  lowered  to  that  rank. 

The  Council  of  Nice  furnishes  another  example  of  a  bishop  lowered  to  the  rank  of  a  chor- 
episcopus in  Canon  viii.  This  canon  shows  that  they  should  not  have  been  bishops,  for  two 
bishops  could  never  be  in  a  diocese,  although  this  might  accidentally  be  the  case  when  a 
chorepiscopus  happened  to  be  a  bishop. 

This  is  the  meaning  which  must  be  given  to  the  tenth  canon  of  Antioch,  which  directs  that 
chorepiscopi,  even  if  they  have  received  episcopal  orders,  and  have  been  consecrated  bishops, 
shall  keep  within  the  limits  prescribed  by  the  canon  ;  that  in  cases  of  necessity,  they  ordain 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325  23 


the  lower  clergy  ;  but  that  they  be  careful  not  to  ordaiu  priests  or  deacons,  because  this 
power  is  absolutely  reserved  to  the  Diocesan.  It  must  be  added  that  as  the  council  of  Anti- 
och  commands  that  the  Diocesan  without  any  other  bishop  can  ordain  the  chorepiscopus,  the 
position  can  no  longer  be  sustained  that  the  chorepiscopi  were  bishops,  such  a  method  of 
consecrating  a  bishop  being  contrary  to  canon  xix.  of  the  same  council,  moreover  the  canon 
does  not  say  the  chorepiscopus  is  to  be  ordained,  but  uses  the  word  yeVeo-^cu  by  the  bishop  of 
the  city  (canon  x.).  The  Council  of  Neocsesarea  by  referring  them  to  the  seventy  disciples 
(in  Canon  XIV.)  has  shown  the  chorepiscopi  to  be  only  priests. 

But  the  Council  of  Ancyra  does  furnish  a  difficulty,  for  the  text  seems  to  permit  chor- 
episcopi to  ordain  priests.  But  the  Greek  text  must  be  corrected  by  the  ancient  Latin  ver- 
sions. The  letter  attributed  to  pope  Nicholas,  a.d.  864,  must  be  considered  a  forgery  since 
he  recognises  the  chorepiscopi  as  real  bishops. 

If  Harmenopulus,  Aristenus,  Balsamon,  and  Zonaras  seem  to  accord  to  the  chorepiscopi 
the  power  to  ordain  priests  and  deacons  with  the  permission  of  the  Diocesan,  it  is  because 
they  are  explaining  the  meaning  and  setting  forth  the  practice  of  the  ancient  councils  and 
not  the  practice  of  their  own  times.  But  at  all  events  it  is  past  all  doubt  that  before  the 
seventh  century  there  were,  by  different  accidents,  chorepiscopi  who  were  really  bishops  and 
that  these  could,  with  the  consent  of  the  diocesan,  ordain  priests.  But  at  the  time  these  au- 
thors wrote,  there  was  not  a  single  chorepiscopus  in  the  entire  East,  as  Balsamon  frankly 
admits  in  commenting  on  Canon  xiii.  of  Ancyra. 

Whether  in  the  foregoing  the  reader  will  think  Thomassinus  has  proved  his  point,  I  do 
not  know,  but  so  far  as  the  position  of  the  chorepiscopi  in  synods  is  concerned  there  can  be 
no  doubt  whatever,  and  I  shall  allow  Hefele  to  speak  on  this  point. 

(Hefele,  History  of  the  Councils,  Vol.  I.  pj:>.  17,  18.) 
The  Chorepiscopi  (xG>p«ri<xK07roi),  or  bishops  of  country  places,  seem  to  have  been  con- 
sidered in  ancient  times  as  quite  on  a  par  with  the  other  bishops,  as  far  as  their  position  in 
synod  was  concerned.  We  meet  with  them  at  the  Councils  of  Neocsesarea  in  the  year  314, 
of  Nicsea  in  325,  of  Ephesus  in  431.  On  the  other  hand,  among  the  600  bishops  of  the  fourth 
Ecumenical  Council  at  Chalcedon  in  451,  there  is  no  chorepiscopus  present,  for  by  this  time 
the  office  had  been  abolished  ;  but  in  the  Middle  Ages  we  again  meet  with  chorepiscopi  of  a 
new  kind  at  Western  councils,  particularly  at  those  of  the  French  Church,  at  Langres  in  830, 
at  Mayence  in  847,  at  Pontion  in  876,  at  Lyons  in  886,  at  Douzy  in  871. 

CANON  IX. 

If  any  presbyters  have  been  advanced  without  examination,  or  if  upon  examination 
they  have  made  confession  of  crime,  and  men  acting  in  violation  of  the  canon  have  laid 
hands  upon  them,  notwithstanding  their  confession,  such  the  canon  does  not  admit ;  for 
the  Catholic  Church  requires  that  [only]  which  is  blameless. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  IX. 
Whoever  are  ordained  without  examination, 
shall  be  deposed  if  it  be  found  out  afterwards 
that  they  had  been  guilty. 

Hefele. 
The   crimes  in   question   are  those  which 
were  a  bar  to  the  priesthood — such  as  blas- 


phemy, bigamy,  heresy,  idolatry,  magic,  etc.— 
as  the  Arabic  paraphrase  of  Joseph  explains. 
It  is  clear  that  these  faults  are  punishable  in 
the  bishop  no  less  than  in  the  priest,  and  that 
consequently  our  canon  refers  to  the  bishops 
as  well  as  to  the  Trpe<T/3vTepoi  in  the  more  re- 
stricted sense.  These  words  of  the  Greek 
text,  "  In  the  case  in  which  any  one  might  be 


24 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


induced,  in  opposition  to  the  canon,  to  ordain 
such  persons,"  allude  to  the  ninth  canon  of 
the  Synod  of  Neocsesarea.  It  was  necessary 
to  pass  such  ordinances  ;  for  even  in  the  fifth 
century,  as  the  twenty-second  letter  to  Pope 
Innocent  the  First  testifies,  some  held  that  as 
baptism  effaces  all  former  sins,  so  it  takes  away 
all  the  impedimenta  ordinationis  which  are  the 
result  of  those  sins. 


Balsamon. 
Some  say  that  as  baptism  makes  the  bap- 
tized person  a  new  man,  so  ordination  takes 
away  the  sins  committed  before  ordination, 
which  opinion  does  not  seem  to  agree  with 
the  canons. 

This  canon  occurs  twice  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici.  Decretum  Pars  I.  Dist.  xxiv.  c. 
vij.,  and  Dist.  lxxxj.,  c.  iv. 


CANON  X. 

If  any  who  have  lapsed  have  been  ordained  through  the  ignorance,  or  even  with  the 
previous  knowledge  of  the  ordainers,  this  shall  not  prejudice  the  canon  of  the  Church  ; 
for  when  they  are  discovered  they  shall  be  deposed. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  X. 


Whoso  had  lapsed  are  to  be  deposed  whether 
those  who  ordained  and  promoted  them  did  so 
conscious  of  their  guilt  or  unknowing  of  it. 

Hefele. 

The  tenth  canon  differs  from  the  ninth,  in- 
asmuch as  it  concerns  only  the  lapsi  and  their 
elevation,  not  only  to  the  priesthood,  but  to 
any  other  ecclesiastical  preferment  as  well, 
and  requires  their  deposition.  The  punish- 
ment of  a  bishop  who  should  consciously  per- 
form such  an  ordination  is  not  mentioned  ; 


but  it  is  incontestable  that  the  lapsi  could  not 
be  ordained,  even  after  having  performed 
penance ;  for,  as  the  preceding  canon  states, 
the  Church  requires  those  who  were  faultless. 
It  is  to  be  observed  that  the  word  irpox<npLt,<Liv 
is  evidently  employed  here  in  the  sense  of 
"ordain,"  and  is  used  without  any  distinction 
from  xeiP%ai,>  whilst  in  the  synodal  letter  of 
the  Council  of  Nicsea  on  the  subject  of  the 
Meletians,  there  is  a  distinction  between  these 
two  words,  and  npox^-pi^iv  is  used  to  signify 
eligere. 

This  canon  is  found  in  Corpus  Juris  Canon- 
ici.    Decretum.     Pars  I.     Dist.  lxxxi.     c.  v. 


CANON  XI. 

Concerning  those  who  have  fallen  without  compulsion,  without  the  spoiling  of  their 
property,  without  danger  or  the  like,  as  happened  during  the  tyranny  of  Licinius,  the 
Synod  declares  that,  though  they  have  deserved  no  clemency,  they  shall  be  dealt  with 
mercifully.  As  many  as  were  communicants,  if  they  heartily  repent,  shall  pass  three 
years  among  the  hearers ;  for  seven  years  they  shall  be  prostrators ;  and  for  two  years 
they  shall  communicate  with  the  people  in  prayers,  but  without  oblation. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XI. 


As  many  as  fell  without  necessity,  even  if 
therefore  undeserving  of  indulgence,  yet  some 
indulgence  shall  be  shown  them  and  they  shall 
be  prostrators  for  twelve  years. 

On  the  expression  "  without  oblation " 
{\u>p\<i  7rpoo-«/)opa9)see  the  notes  to  Ancyra,  Canon 
V,  where  the  matter  is  treated  at  some  length. 


Lambert. 


The  usual  position  of  the  hearers  was  just 
inside  the  church  door.  But  Zonaras  (and 
Balsamon  agrees  with  him),  in  his  comment 
on  this  canon,  says,  "they  are  ordered  for 
thi*ee  years  to  be  hearers,  or  to  stand  without 
the  church  in  the  narthex." 

I  have  read  "as  many  as  were  communi- 
cants "  (ol  TTto-Toi)   thus  following  Dr.  Bouth. 


L  NICE.     A.D.  325 


25 


Vide  his  Opuscula.  Caranza  translates  in  his 
Summary  of  the  Councils  "  if  they  were  faith- 
ful "  and  seems  to  have  read  ei  iruyrol,  which 
is  much  simpler  and  makes  better  sense. 


ZONAEAS. 

The  prostrators  stood  within  the  body  of 
the  church  behind  the  ambo  [i.e.  the  reading 
desk]  and  went  out  with  the  catechumens. 


EXCURSUS  ON  THE  PUBLIC  DISCIPLINE  OR  EXOMOLOGESIS  OF  THE 

EARLY   CHURCH. 

(Taken  chiefly  from  Morinus,  De  Disciplina  in  Administratione  Sacramenti  Poenitentice  ; 
Bingham,  Antiquities ;  and  Hammond,  The  Definitions  of  Faith,  etc.  Note  to  Canon  XL  of 
Nice.) 

"  In  the  Primitive  Church  there  was  a  godly  discipline,  that  at  the  beginning  of  Lent, 
such  persons  as  stood  convicted  of  notorious  sin  were  put  to  open  penance,  and  punished  in 
this  world  that  their  souls  might  be  saved  in  the  day  of  the  Lord  ;  and  that  others,  admon- 
ished by  their  example,  might  be  the  more  afraid  to  offend." 

The  foregoing  words  from  the  Commination  Service  of  the  Church  of  England  may 
serve  well  to  introduce  this  subject.  In  the  history  of  the  public  administration  of  discipline 
in  the  Church,  there  are  three  periods  sufficiently  distinctly  marked.  The  first  of  these  ends 
at  the  rise  of  Novatianism  in  the  middle  of  the  second  century  ;  the  second  stretches  down 
to  about  the  eighth  century ;  and  the  third  period  shews  its  gradual  decline  to  its  practical 
abandonment  in  the  eleventh  century.  The  period  with  which  we  are  concerned  is  the  sec- 
ond, when  it  was  in  full  force. 

In  the  first  period  it  would  seem  that  public  penance  was  required  only  of  those  con- 
victed of  what  then  were  called  by  pre-eminence  "  mortal  sins "  {crimena  mortalia  2),  viz : 
idolatry,  murder,  and  adultery.  But  in  the  second  period  the  list  of  mortal  sins  was  greatly 
enlarged,  and  Morinus  says  that  "Many  Fathers  who  wrote  after  Augustine's  time,  extended 
the  necessity  of  public  penance  to  all  crimes  which  the  civil  law  punished  with  death,  exile, 
or  other  grave  corporal  penalty."2  In  the  penitential  canons  ascribed  to  St.  Basil  and 
those  which  pass  by  the  name  of  St.  Gregory  Nyssen,  this  increase  of  offences  requiring 
public  penance  will  be  found  intimated. 

From  the  fourth  century  the  penitents  of  the  Church  were  divided  into  four  classes. 
Three  of  these  are  mentioned  in  the  eleventh  canon,  the  fourth,  which  is  not  here  referred  to, 
was  composed  of  those  styled  o-uyKAcuWes,  flentes  or  weepers.  These  were  not  allowed  to 
enter  into  the  body  of  the  church  at  all,  but  stood  or  lay  outside  the  gates,  sometimes  cov- 
ered with  sackcloth  and  ashes.  This  is  the  class  which  is  sometimes  styled  x^^o^o/xivoi,  hyber- 
nantes,  on  account  of  their  being  obliged  to  endure  the  inclemency  of  the  weather. 

It  may  help  to  the  better  understanding  of  this  and  other  canons  which  notice  the  differ- 
ent orders  of  penitents,  to  give  a  brief  account  of  the  usual  form  and  arrangement  of  the 
ancient  churches  as  well  as  of  the  different  orders  of  the  penitents. 

Before  the  church  there  was  commonly  either  an  open  area  surrounded  with  porticoes, 
called  [xea-dvXiov  or  atrium,  with  a  font  of  water  in  the  centre,  styled  a  cantharus  or  phiala,  or 
sometimes  only  an  open  portico,  or  -rrpoirvXaiov.  The  first  variety  may  still  be  seen  at  S.  Am- 
brogio's  in  Milan,  and  the  latter  in  Rome  at  S.  Lorenzo's,  and  in  Ravenna  at  the  two  S.  Apol- 
linares.  This  was  the  place  at  which  the  first  and  lowest  order  of  penitents,  the  weepers, 
already  referred  to,  stood  exposed  to  the  weather.  Of  these,  St.  Gregory  Thaumaturgus 
says:  "Weeping  takes  place  outside  the  door  of  the  church,  where  the  sinner  must  stand 
and  beg  the  prayers  of  the  faithful  as  they  go  in." 

The  church  itself  usually  consisted  of  three  divisions  within,  besides  these  exterior  courts 


1  Cyprian.    De  Bono  Patient.,  cap.  xiv. 


2  Morinus,  De  Poznitent.,  lib.  v.,  cap.  5. 


26  I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


and  porch.  The  first  part  after  passing  through  "  the  great  gates,"  or  doors  of  the  building, 
was  called  the  Narthex  in  Greek,  and  Fserula  in  Latin,  and  was  a  narrow  vestibule  extending 
the  whole  width  of  the  church.  In  this  part,  to  which  Jews  and  Gentiles,  and  in  most  places 
even  heretics  and  schismatics  were  admitted,  stood  the  Catechumens,  and  the  Energumens 
or  those  afflicted  with  evil  spirits,  and  the  second  class  of  penitents  (the  first  mentioned  in 
the  Canon),  who  were  called  the  aKoufievoi,  audientes,  or  hearers.  These  were  allowed  to  hear 
the  Scriptures  read,  and  the  Sermon  preached,  but  were  obliged  to  depart  before  the  cele- 
bration of  the  Divine  Mysteries,  with  the  Catechumens,  and  the  others  who  went  by  the 
general  name  of  hearers  only. 

The  second  division,  or  main  body  of  the  church,  was  called  the  Naos  or  Nave.  This 
was  separated  from  the  Narthex  by  rails  of  wood,  with  gates  in  the  centre,  which  were 
called  "  the  beautiful  or  royal  gates."  In  the  middle  of  the  Nave,  but  rather  toward  the 
lower  or  entrance  part  of  it,  stood  the  Ambo,  or  reading-desk,  the  place  for  the  readers 
and  singers,  to  which  they  went  up  by  steps,  whence  the  name,  Ambo.  Before  coming  to 
the  Ambo,  in  the  lowest  part  of  the  Nave,  and  just  after  passing  the  royal  gates,  was  the 
place  for  the  third  order  of  penitents,  called  in  Greek  yowKXivovTc;,  or  vttottitttovt^,  and  in 
Latin  Geuuflectentes  or  Prostrati,  i.e.,  kneelers  or  prostrators,  because  they  were  allowed  to 
remain  and  join  in  certain  prayers  particularly  made  for  them.  Before  going  out  they  pros- 
trated themselves  to  receive  the  imposition  of  the  bishop's  hands  with  prayer.  This  class  of 
penitents  left  with  the  Catechumens. 

In  the  other  parts  of  the  Nave  stood  the  believers  or  faithful,  i.e.,  those  persons  who  were 
in  full  communion  with  the  Church,  the  men  and  women  generally  on  opposite  sides,  though 
in  some  places  the  men  were  below,  and  the  women  in  galleries  above.  Amongst  these  were 
the  fourth  class  of  penitents,  who  were  called  o-wecnwes,  consistentes,  i.e.,  co-standers, 
because  they  were  allowed  to  stand  with  the  faithful,  and  to  remain  and  hear  the  prayers 
of  the  Church,  after  the  Catechumens  and  the  other  penitents  were  dismissed,  and  to  be 
present  while  the  faithful  offered  and  communicated,  though  they  might  not  themselves 
make  their  offerings,  nor  partake  of  the  Holy  Communion.  This  class  of  penitents  are  fre- 
quently mentioned  in  the  canons,  as  "communicating  in  prayers,"  or  "without  the  oblation  ;" 
and  it  was  the  last  grade  to  be  passed  through  previous  to  the  being  admitted  again  to  full 
communion.  The  practice  of  "  hearing  mass  "  or  "  non-communicating  attendance  "  clearly 
had  its  origin  in  this  stage  of  discipline.  At  the  upper  end  of  the  body  of  the  church,  and 
divided  from  it  by  rails  which  were  called  Cancelli,  was  that  part  which  we  now  call  the 
Chancel.  This  was  anciently  called  by  several  names,  as  Bema  or  tribunal,  from  its  being 
raised  above  the  body  of  the  church,  and  Sacrarium  or  Sanctuary.  It  was  also  called  Apsis 
and  Concha  Bematis,  from  its  semicircular  end.  In  this  part  stood  the  Altar,  or  Holy  Table 
(which  names  were  indifferently  used  in  the  primitive  Church),  behind  which,  and  against 
the  wall  of  the  chancel,  was  the  Bishop's  throne,  with  the  seats  of  the  Presbyters  on  each 
side  of  it,  called  synthronus.  On  one  side  of  the  chancel  was  the  repository  for  the  sacred 
utensils  and  vestments,  called  the  Diaconicuin,  and  answering  to  our  Vestry  ;  and  on  the 
other  the  Prothesis,  a  side-table,  or  place,  where  the  bread  and  wine  were  deposited  before 
they  were  offered  on  the  Altar.  The  gates  in  the  chancel  rail  were  called  the  holy  gates, 
and  none  but  the  higher  orders  of  the  clergy,  i.e.,  Bishops,  Priests,  and  Deacons,  were  allowed 
to  enter  within  them.  The  Emperor  indeed  was  permitted  to  do  so  for  the  purpose  of  mak- 
ing his  offering  at  the  Altar,  but  then  he  was  obliged  to  retire  immediately,  and  to  receive 
the  communion  without. 

(Thomassin.  Ancienne  et  Nouvelle  Discipline  de  VEglise.  Tom.  I.  Livre  II.  chap.  xvj. 
somewhat  abridged.) 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325  21 


In  the  West  there  existed  always  many  cases  of  public  penance,  but  in  the  East  it  is  more 
difficult  to  find  any  traces  of  it,  after  it  was  abolished  by  the  Patriarch  Nectarius  in  the  per- 
son of  the  Grand  Penitentiary. 

However,  the  Emperor  Alexis  Comnenus,  who  took  the  empire  in  the  year  1080,  did  a 
penance  like  that  of  older  days,  and  one  which  may  well  pass  for  miraculous.  He  called 
together  a  large  number  of  bishops  with  the  patriarch,  and  some  holy  religious  ;  he  pre- 
sented himself  before  them  in  the  garb  of  a  criminal ;  he  confessed  to  them  his  crime  of 
usurpation  with  all  its  circumstances.  They  condemned  the  Emperor  and  all  his  accomplices 
to  fasting,  to  lying  prostrate  upon  the  earth,  to  wearing  haircloth,  and  to  all  the  other  ordi- 
nary austerities  of  penance.  Their  wives  desired  to  share  their  griefs  and  their  sufferings, 
although  they  had  had  no  share  in  their  crime.  The  whole  palace  became  a  theatre  of  sor- 
row and  public  penance.  The  emperor  wore  the  hairshirt  under  the  purple,  and  lay  upon 
the  earth  for  forty  days,  having  only  a  stone  for  a  pillow. 

To  all  practical  purposes  Public  Penance  was  a  general  institution  but  for  a  short  while 
in  the  Church.  But  the  reader  must  be  careful  to  distinguish  between  this  Public  Penance 
and  the  private  confession  which  in  the  Catholic  Church  both  East  and  West  is  universally 
practised.  What  Nectarius  did  was  to  abolish  the  office  of  Penitentiary,  whose  duty  it 
had  been  to  assign  public  penance  for  secret  sin  j1  a  thing  wholly  different  from  what  Catho- 
lics understand  by  the  "  Sacrament  of  Penance."  It  would  be  out  of  place  to  do  more  in 
this  place  than  to  call  the  reader's  attention  to  the  bare  fact,  and  to  supply  him,  from  a 
Roman  Catholic  point  of  view,  with  an  explanation  of  why  Public  Penance  died  out.  "  It  came 
to  an  end  because  it  was  of  human  institution.  But  sacramental  confession,  being  of  divine 
origin,  lasted  when  the  penitential  discipline  had  been  changed,  and  continues  to  this  day 
among  the  Greeks  and  Oriental  sects."2  That  the  reader  may  judge  of  the  absolute  can- 
dour of  the  writer  just  quoted,  I  give  a  few  sentences  from  the  same  article  :  "  An  opinion, 
however,  did  prevail  to  some  extent  in  the  middle  ages,  even  among  Catholics,  that  confes- 
sion to  God  alone  sufficed.  The  Council  of  Chalons  in  813  (canon  xxxiij.),  says:  'Some 
assert  that  we  should  confess  our  sins  to  God  alone,  but  some  think  that  they  should  be 
confessed  to  the  priest,  each  of  which  practices  is  followed  not  without  great  fruit  in  Holy 
Church.  .  .  .  Confession  made  to  God  purges  sins,  but  that  made  to  the  priest  teaches 
how  they  are  to  be  purged.'  This  former  opinion  is  also  mentioned  without  reprobation  by 
Peter  Lombard  (In  Sentent.  Lib.  iv.  dist.  xvij.)." 

CANON  XII. 

As  many  as  were  called  by  grace,  and  displayed  the  first  zeal,  having  cast  aside  their 
military  girdles,  but  afterwards  returned,  like  dogs,  to  their  oavu  vomit,  (so  that  some 
spent  money  and  by  means  of  gifts  regained  their  military  stations)  ;  let  these,  after 
they  have  passed  the  space  of  three  years  as  hearers,  be  for  ten  years  prostrators.  But 
in  all  these  cases  it  is  necessary  to  examine  well  into  their  purpose  and  what  their 
repentance  appears  to  be  like.  For  as  many  as  give  evidence  of  their  conversions  by 
deeds,  and  not  pretence,  with  fear,  and  tears,  and  perseverance,  and  good  works,  when 
they  have  fulfilled  their  appointed  time  as  hearers,  may  properly  communicate  in 
prayers  ;  and  after  that  the  bishop  may  determine  yet  more  favourably  concerning 
them.  But  those  Avho  take  [the  matter]  with  indifference,  and  who  think  the  form  of 
[not]  entering  the  Church  is  sufficient  for  their  conversion,  must  fulfil  the  whole  time. 

1  Vide,  Thomassin.     Lib.  eit.  Livre  II.  Chapitre  vii.  §  xiii.  |     2  Addis  and  Arnold.     A  Catholic  Dictionary ;  sub  voce  Pen- 
Where  the  whole  matter  of  Nectarius's  action  is  discussed.  |  ance,  Sacrament  of. 


28 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XII. 


Those  who  endured  violence  and  were  seen  to 
have  resisted,  but  who  afterwards  yielded  to 
wickedness,  and  returned  to  the  army,  shall  be 
excommunicated  for  ten  years.  But  in  every 
case  the  way  in  which  they  do  their  penance 
must  be  scrutinized.  And  if  anyone  who  is  do- 
ing penance  shews  himself  zealous  in  its  per- 
formance, the  bishop  shall  treat  him  more  leni- 
ently than  had  he  been  cold  and  indifferent. 

Lambert. 

The  abuse  of  this  power,  namely,  of  grant- 
ing under  certain  circumstances  a  relaxation 
in  the  penitential  exercises  enjoined  by  the 
canons — led,  in  later  times,  to  the  practice  of 
commuting  such  exercises  for  money  pay- 
ments, etc. 

Hefele. 

In  his  last  contests  with  Constantine,  Li- 
einius  had  made  himself  the  representative 
of  heathenism  ;  so  that  the  final  issue  of  the 
war  would  not  be  the  mere  triumph  of  one  of 
the  two  competitors,  but  the  triumph  or  fall 
of  Christianity  or  heathenism.  Accordingly, 
a  Christian  who  had  in  this  war  supported  the 
cause  of  Licinius  and  of  heathenism  might  be 
considered  as  a  lapsus,  even  if  he  did  not  for- 
mally fall  away.  With  much  more  reason 
might  those  Christians  be  treated  as  lapsi 
who,  having  conscientiously  given  up  military 
service  (this  is  meant  by  the  soldier's  belt), 
afterwards  retracted  their  resolution,  and 
went  so  far  as  to  give  money  and  presents  for 
the  sake  of  readmission,  on  account  of  the  nu- 
merous advantages  which  military  service  then 
afforded.  It  must  not  be  forgotten  that  Li- 
cinius, as  Zonaras  and  Eusebius  relate,  re- 
quired from  his  soldiers  a  formal  apostasy  ; 
compelled  them,  for  example,  to  take  part  in 
the  heathen  sacrifices  which  were  held  in  the 
camps,  and  dismissed  from  his  service  those 
who  would  not  apostatize. 

Bright. 

This  canon  (which  in  the  Prisca  and  the 
Isidorian  version  stands  as  part  of  canon  11) 
deals,  like  it,  with  cases  which  had  arisen  un- 
der the  Eastern  reign  of  Licinius,  who  having 
resolved  to  "  purge  his  army  of  all  ardent 
Christians"  (Mason,  Persec.  of  Diocl.  p.  308), 
ordered  his  Christian  officers  to  sacrifice  to 
the  gods  on  pain  of  being  cashiered  (compare 
Euseb.  H.  E.x.8;  Vit.  Con.  i.  54).     It  is  to 


be  observed  here  that  military  life  as  such  was 
not  deemed  unchristian.  The  case  of  Corne- 
lius was  borne  in  mind.  "We  serve  in  your 
armies,  "  says  Tertullian,  Apol.  42  (although 
later,  as  a  Montanist,  he  took  a  rigorist  and 
fanatical  view,  De  Cor.  11),  and  compare  the 
fact  which  underlies  the  tale  of  the  "Thun- 
dering Legion," — the  presence  of  Christians 
in  the  army  of  Marcus  Aurelius.  It  was  the 
heathenish  adjuncts  to  their  calling  which 
often  brought  Christian  soldiers  to  a  stand  (see 
Routh.  Scr.  Opusc.  i.  410),  as  when  Marinus' 
succession  to  a  centurionship  was  challenged 
on  the  ground  that  he  could  not  sacrifice  to 
the  gods  (Euseb.  H.  E.  vii.  15).  Sometimes, 
indeed,  individual  Christians  thought  like 
Maximilian  in  the  Martyrology,  who  absolutely 
refused  to  enlist,  and  on  being  told  by  the 
proconsul  that  there  were  Christian  soldiers 
in  the  imperial  service,  answered,  "Ipsi  sciunt 
quod  ipsis  expediat "  (Ruinart,  Act.  Sane.  p. 
341).  But,  says  Bingham  (Antiq.  xi.  5,  10), 
"  the  ancient  canons  did  not  condemn  the  mil- 
itary life  as  a  vocation  simply  unlawful.  .  .  . 
I  believe  there  is  no  instance  of  any  man  being 
refused  baptism  merely  because  he  was  a  sol- 
dier, unless  some  unlawful  circumstance,  such 
as  idolatry,  or  the  like,  made  the  vocation  sin- 
ful." After  the  victory  of  Constantine  in  the 
West,  the  Council  of  Aries  excommunicated 
those  who  in  time  of  peace  "  threw  away  their 
arms  "  (can.  2).  In  the  case  before  us,  some 
Christian  officers  had  at  first  stood  firm  under 
the  trial  imposed  on  them  by  Licinius.  They 
had  been  "  called  by  grace  "  to  an  act  of  self- 
sacrifice  (the  phrase  is  one  which  St.  Augus- 
tine might  have  used) ;  and  had  shown  "  their 
eagerness  at  the  outset  "  ("primum  suum  ar- 
dorem,"  Dionysius  ;  Philoand  Evarestus  more 
laxly,  "primordia  bona  ;  "  compare  rrjv  S.yaTrrjv 
(jov  T7)v  7rpwTi]v,  Rev.  ii.  4).  Observe  here  how 
beautifully  the  ideas  of  grace  and  free  will  are 
harmonized.  These  men  had  responded  to  a 
Divine  impulse  :  it  might  seem  that  they  had 
committed  themselves  to  a  noble  course  :  they 
had  cast  aside  the  "  belts  "  which  were  their 
badge  of  office  (compare  the  cases  of  Valen- 
tinian  and  Valens,  Soc.  iii.  13,  and  of  Benevo- 
lus  throwing  down  his  belt  at  the  feet  of  Jus- 
tina,  Soz.  vii.  13).  They  had  done,  in  fact, 
just  what  Auxentius,  one  of  Licinius'  notaiies, 
had  done  when,  according  to  the  graphic  anec- 
dote of  Philostorgius  (Fragm.  5),  his  master 
bade  him  place  a  bunch  of  grapes  before  a 
statue  of  Bacchus  in  the  palace-court ;  but 
their  zeal,  unlike  his,  proved  to  be  too  impul- 
sive— they  reconsidered  their  position,  and 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


29 


illustrated  the  maxim  that  in  morals  second 
thoughts  are  not  best  (Butler,  Serm.  7),  by 
making  unworthy  attempts — in  some  cases 
by  bribery — to  recover  what  they  had  worth- 
ily resigned.  (Observe  the  Grecised  Latinism 
/3eve(£i/aois  and  compare  the  Latinisms  of  St. 
Mark,  and  others  in  Euseb.  iii.  20,  vi.  40,  x. 
5.)  This  the  Council  describes  in  proverbial 
language,  probably  borrowed  from  2  Pet.  ii. 
22,  but,  it  is  needless  to  say,  without  intend- 
ing to  censure  enlistment  as  such.  They 
now  desired  to  be  received  to  penance  :  ac- 
cordingly they  were  ordered  to  spend  three 
years  as  Hearers,  during  which  time  "  their 
purpose,  and  the  nature  (elSog)  of  their  re- 
pentance"  were  to  be  carefully  "examined." 
Again  we  see  the  earnest  resolution  of  the 
Council  to  make  discipline  a  moral  reality, 
and  to  prevent  it  from  being  turned  into  a 
formal  routine  ;  to  secure,  as  Rufinus'  abridg- 
ment expresses  it,  a  repentance  "  fructuosam 
et  attentam."  If  the  penitents  were  found  to 
have  "  manifested  their  conversion  by  deeds, 
and  not  in  outward  show  (cr^^aTi),  by  awe,  and 
tears,  and  patience,  and  good  works"  (such, 
for  instance,  Zonaras  comments,  as  almsgiving 
according  to  ability),  "it  would  be  then  rea- 
sonable to  admit  them  to  a  participation  in 
the  prayers,"  to  the  position  of  Consistentes, 
"with  permission  also  to  the  bishop  to  come 
to  a  yet  more  indulgent  resolution  concerning 
them,"  by  admitting  them  to  full  communion. 
This  discretionary  power  of  the  bishop  to  dis- 
pense with  part  of  a  penance-time  is  recog- 
nized in  the  fifth  canon  of  Ancyra  and  the  six- 
teenth of  Chalcedon,  and  mentioned  by  Basil, 


Epist.  217,  c.  74.  It  was  the  basis  of  "  indul- 
gences "  in  their  original  form  (Bingham,  xviii. 
4,  9).  But  it  was  too  possible  that  some  at 
least  of  these  "  lapsi  "  might  take  the  whole 
affair  lightly,  "  with  indifference  "  dSta^opco? — 
not  seriously  enough,  as  Hervetas  renders — 
just  as  if,  in  common  parlance,  it  did  not  sig- 
nify :  the  fourth  Ancyrene  canon  speaks  of 
lapsi  who  partook  of  the  idol-feast  dSta^dpws 
as  if  it  involved  them  in  no  sin  (see  below  on 
Eph.  5,  Chalc.  4).  It  was  possible  that  they 
might  "deem  "  the  outward  form  of  "  entering 
the  church  "  to  stand  in  the  narthex  among 
the  Hearers  (here,  as  in  c.  8,  19,  a-^jxa  de- 
notes an  external  visible  fact)  sufficient  to  en- 
title them  to  the  character  of  converted  peni- 
tents, while  their  conduct  out  of  church  was 
utterly  lacking  in  seriousness  and  self-humili- 
ation. In  that  case  there  could  be  no  ques- 
tion of  shortening  their  penance,  time,  for  they 
were  not  in  a  state  to  benefit  by  indulgence  : 
it  would  be,  as  the  Roman  Presbyters  wrote  to 
Cyprian,  and  as  he  himself  wrote  to  his  own 
church,  a  "  mere  covering  over  of  the  wound  " 
(IJpist.  30,  3),  an  "injury"  rather  than  "a  kind- 
ness "  (Be  Lapsis,  16)  ;  they  must  therefore 
"by  all  means  "  go  through  ten  years  as  Kneel- 
ers,  before  they  can  become  Consistentes. 

There  is  great  difficulty  about  the  last 
phrase  and  Gelasius  of  Cyzicus,  the  Prisca, 
Dionysius  Exiguus,  the  pseudo-Isidore,  Zo- 
naras and  most  others  have  considered  the 
"  not "  an  interpolation.  I  do  not  see  how 
dropping  the  "  not "  makes  the  meaning  mate- 
rially clearer. 


CANON  XIII. 

Concerning  the  departing,  the  ancient  canonical  law  is  still  to  be  maintained,  to  wit, 
that,  if  any  man  be  at  the  point  of  death,  he  must  not  be  deprived  of  the  last  and  most 
indispensable  Viaticum.  But,  if  any  one  should  be  restored  to  health  again  who  has  re- 
ceived the  communion  when  his  life  was  despaired  of,  let  him  remain  among  those  who 
communicate  in  prayers  only.  But  in  general,  and  in  the  case  of  any  dying  person 
whatsoever  asking  to  receive  the  Eucharist,  let  the  Bishop,  after  examination  made,  give 
it  him. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XIII. 


The  dying  are  to  be  communicated.  But  if 
any  such  get  well,  he  must  be  placed  in  the  num- 
ber of  those  who  share  in  the  prayers,  and  ivith 
these  only. 

Van  Espen. 

It  cannot  be  denied  that  antiquity  used  the 
name  "  Viaticum  "  not  only  to  denote  the  Eu- 
charist which  was  given  to  the"  dying,  but  also 


to  denote  the  reconciliation,  and  imposition 
of  penance,  and  in  general,  everything  that 
could  be  conducive  to  the  happy  death  of  the 
person  concerned,  and  this  has  been  shown 
by  Aubespine  (lib.  1,  Obs.  cap.  ii.).  But  while 
this  is  so,  the  more  usual  sense  of  the  word  is 
the  Eucharist.  For  this  cannot  be  denied 
that  the  faithful  of  the  first  ages  of  the  Church 
looked  upon  the  Eucharist  as  the  complement 
of  Christian  perfection,  and  as  the  last  seal  of 


30 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


hope  and  salvation.  It  was  for  this  reason 
that  at  the  beginning  of  life,  after  baptism 
and  confirmation,  the  Eucharist  was  given 
even  to  infants,  and  at  the  close  of  life  the 
Eucharist  followed  reconciliation  and  extreme 
unction,  so  that  properly  and  literally  it  could 
be  styled  "  the  last  Viaticum."  Moreover  for 
penitents  it  was  considered  especially  neces- 
sary that  through  it  they  might  return  to  the 
peace  of  the  Church  ;  for  perfect  peace  is 
given  by  that  very  communion  of  the  Eucha- 
rist. [A  number  of  instances  are  then  cited, 
and  various  ancient  versions  of  the  canon.] 


Balsamon  and  Zonaras  also  understand  the 
canon  as  I  have  done,  as  is  evident  from  their 
commentaries,  and  so  did  Josephus  JEgyptius, 
who  in  his  Arabic  Paraphrase  gives  the  canon 
this  title  :  "  Concerning  him  who  is  excom- 
municated and  has  committed  some  deadly 
sin,  and  desires  the  Eucharist  to  be  granted 
to  him." 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian,  Decretum  Pars.  II.  causa 
xxvi,  Quaes.  VI.,  c.  ix. 


EXCURSUS  ON  THE  COMMUNION  OF  THE  SICK. 

There  is  nothing  upon  which  the  ancient  church  more  strenuously  insisted  than  the  oral 
reception  of  the  Holy  Communion.  What  in  later  times  was  known  as  "  Spiritual  Commun- 
ion "  was  outside  of  the  view  of  those  early  days ;  and  to  them  the  issues  of  eternity  were 
considered  often  to  rest  upon  the  sick  man's  receiving  with  his  mouth  "  his  food  for  the  jour- 
ney," the  Viaticum,  before  he  died.  No  greater  proof  of  how  important  this  matter  was 
deemed  could  be  found  than  the  present  canon,  which  provides  that  even  the  stern  and  in- 
variable canons  of  the  public  penance  are  to  give  way  before  the  awful  necessity  of  fortifying 
the  soul  in  the  last  hour  of  its  earthly  sojourn. 

Possibly  at  first  the  holy  Sacrament  may  have  been  consecrated  in  the  presence  of  the  sick 
person,  but  of  this  in  early  times  the  instances  are  rare  and  by  no  means  clear.  In  fact  it 
was  considered  a  marked  favour  that  such  a  thing  should  be  allowed,  and  the  saying  of  mass 
in  private  houses  was  prohibited  (as  it  is  in  the  Eastern  and  Latin  churches  still  to-day)  with 
the  greatest  rigour. 

The  necessity  of  having  the  consecrated  bread  and  wine  for  the  sick  led  to  their  reserva- 
tion, a  practice  which  has  existed  in  the  Church  from  the  very  beginning,  so  far  as  any  records 
of  which  we  are  in  possession  shew. 

St.  Justin  Martyr,  writing  less  than  a  half  century  after  St.  John's  death,  mentions  that 
"  the  deacons  communicate  each  of  those  present,  and  carry  away  to  the  absent  the  blest 
bread,  and  wine  and  water."  1     It  was  evidently  a  long  established  custom  in  his  day. 

Tertullian  tells  us  of  a  woman  whose  husband  was  a  heathen  and  who  was  allowed  to 
keep  the  Holy  Sacrament  in  her  house  that  she  might  receive  every  morning  before  other 
food.  St.  Cyprian  also  gives  a  most  interesting  example  of  reservation.  In  his  treatise  "  On 
the  Lapsed  "  written  in  a.d.  251,  (chapter  xxvi),  he  says  :  "Another  woman,  when  she  tried 
with  unworthy  hands  to  open  her  box,  in  which  was  the  Holy  of  the  Lord,  was  deterred  from 
daring  to  touch  it  by  fire  rising  from  it." 

It  is  impossible  with  any  accuracy  to  fix  the  date,  but  certainly  before  the  year  four  hun- 
dred, a  perpetual  reservation  for  the  sick  was  made  in  the  churches.  A  most  interesting  in- 
cidental proof  of  this  is  found  in  the  thrilling  description  given  by  St.  Chrysostom  of  the 
great  riot  in  Constantinople  in  the  year  403,  when  the  soldiers  "  burst  into  the  place  where 
the  Holy  Things  were  stored,  and  saw  all  things  therein,"  and  "  the  most  holy  blood  of  Christ 
was  spilled  upon  their  clothes."  2  From  this  incident  it  is  evident  that  in  that  church  the 
Holy  Sacrament  was  reserved  in  both  kinds,  and  separately. 

Whether  this  at  the  time  was  usual  it  is  hard  to  say,  but  there  can  b  e  no  doubt  that 
even  in  the  earliest  times  the  Sacrament  was  given,  on  rare  occasions  at  least,  in  one  kind, 


1  Just  M.  Apol.  I.  cap.  lxv. 


2  Chrys.  Ejo.  ad  Innoc.  Sec.  3. 


I.  NICE.    A.D.  325 


31 


sometimes  under  the  form  of  bread  alone,  and  when  the  sick  persons  could  not  swallow  under 
the  form  of  wine  alone.  The  practice  called  "  intinction,"  that  is  the  dipping  of  the  bread 
into  the  wine  and  administering  the  two  species  together,  was  of  very  early  introduction  and 
still  is  universal  in  the  East,  not  only  when  Communion  is  given  with  the  reserved  Sacra- 
ment, but  also  when  the  people  are  communicated  in  the  Liturgy  from  the  newly  consecrated 
species.  The  first  mention  of  intinction  in  the  West,  is  at  Carthage  in  the  fifth  century.1  We 
know  it  was  practised  in  the  seventh  century  and  by  the  twelfth  it  had  become  general,  to  give 
place  to  the  withdrawal  of  the  chalice  altogether  in  the  West.2  "Regino  (De  Eccles.  Discvp. 
Lib.  I.  c.  lxx.)  in  906,  Burchard  {Deer.  Lib.  V.  cap.  ix.  fol.  95.  colon.  1560.)  in  996,  and  Ivo 
{Deer.  Pars.  II.  cap.  xix.  p.  56,  Paris  1647)  in  1092  all  cite  a  Canon,  which  they  ascribe  to  a 
council  of  Tours  ordering '  every  presbyter  to  have  a  pyx  or  vessel  meet  for  so  great  a  sacra- 
ment, in  which  the  Body  of  the  Lord  may  be  carefully  laid  up  for  the  Viaticum  to  those  de- 
parting from  this  world,  which  sacred  oblation  ought  to  be  steeped  in  the  Blood  of  Christ 
that  the  presbyter  may  be  able  to  say  truthfully  to  the  sick  man,  The  Body  and  Blood  of  the 
Lord  avail  thee,  etc'  "3 

The  reservation  of  the  Holy  Sacrament  was  usually  made  in  the  church  itself,  and  the 
learned  W.  E.  Scudamore  is  of  opinion  that  this  was  the  case  in  Africa  as  early  as  the  fourth 
century.4 

It  will  not  be  uninteresting  to  quote  in  this  connection  the  "Apostolic  Constitutions," 
for  while  indeed  there  is  much  doubt  of  the  date  of  the  Eighth  Book,  yet  it  is  certainly  of 
great  antiquity.  Here  we  read,  "  and  after  the  communion  of  both  men  and  women,  the 
deacons  take  what  remains  and  place  it  in  the  tabernacle."5 

Perhaps  it  may  not  be  amiss  before  closing  the  remark  that  so  far  as  we  are  aware  the 
reservation  of  the  Holy  Sacrament  in  the  early  church  was  only  for  the  purposes  of  com- 
munion, and  that  the  churches  of  the  East  reserve  it  to  the  present  day  only  for  this  purpose. 

Those  who  wish  to  read  the  matter  treated  of  more  at  length,  can  do  so  in  Muratorius's 
learned  "Dissertations  "  which  are  prefixed  to  his  edition  of  the  Roman  Sacramentaries  (chap- 
ter XXIV)  and  in  Scudamore's  Notitia  Eueharistica,  a  work  which  can  be  absolutely  relied 
upon  for  the  accuracy  of  its  facts,  however  little  one  may  feel  constrained  to  accept  the  logi- 
cal justness  of  its  conclusions. 


CANON  XIV. 

Concerning  catechumens  who  have  lapsed,  the  holy  and  great  Synod  has  decreed 
that,  after  they  have  passed  three  years  only  as  hearers,  they  shall  pray  with  the  cate- 
chumens. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XIV. 


If  any  of  the  catechumens  shall  have  fallen 
for  three  years  he  shall  be  a  hearer  only,  and 
then  let  him  pray  with  the  catechumens. 

Justellus. 

The  people  formerly  were  divided  into  three 
classes  in  the  church,  for  there  were  catechu- 

1 1  give  the  reference  as  in  Scudamore's  Not.  Euch.  from  which 
I  have  taken  it.  De  Prom,  et  Pried.  Dei ;  Dimid.  Temp.  c.  C ; 
inter  Opp.  Prosperi,  p.  161.  ed.  1G09. 

2  Cf.  Scudamore.  Not.  Euch.  p.  705. 

3  Scudamore.  Notit.  Euch.  p.  707. 

4  W.  E.  Scudamore.  Notitia  Eueharistica  [2d.  Ed.]  p.  1025. 

6  Apost.  Const.  Lib.  viii.  cap.  xiij.  The  word  used  is  nao-To- 
<j>dpio,  this  may  possibly  mean  a  side  chapel,  and  does  occur  in 


mens,  faithful,  and  penitents ;  but  it  is  clear 
from  the  present  canon  there  were  two  kinds 
of  catechumens  :  one  consisting  of  those  who 
heard  the  Word  of  God,  and  wished  to  become 
Christians,  but  had  not  yet  desired  baptism  ; 
these  were  called  "  hearers."  Others  who  were 
of  long  standing,  and  were  properly  trained 
in  the  faith,  and  desired  baptism — these  were 
called  "  competentes." 

the  Book  of  Maccabees  in  this  sense  ;  but  its  classical  use  is  to 
signify  the  shrine  of  a  god,  and  while  so  distinguished  a  writer 
as  Pierre  Le  Brun  adopts  the  later  meaning,  the  no  less  famous 
Durant,  together  with  most  commentators,  translate  as  I  have 
done  above.  In  either  case  for  the  present  purpose,  the  quotation 
is  conclusive  of  the  practice  of  the  primitive  church  in  regard  to 
this  matter.  Liddell  and  Scott  give  "  Trao-ro^opos,  one  carrying 
the  image  of  a  god  in  a  shrine,"  , ,  _ 


32 


I.  NICE.    A.D.  325 


There  is  difference  of  opinion  among  the 
learned  as  to  whether  there  was  not  a  third  or 
even  a  fourth  class  of  catechumens.  Bing- 
ham and  Card.  Bona,  while  not  agreeing  in 
particular  points,  agree  in  affirming  that  there 
were  more  than  two  classes.  Bingham's  first 
class  are  those  not  allowed  to  enter  the  church, 
the  Z£(i>$oviJ.evoi.,  but  the  affirmation  of  the  ex- 
istence of  such  a  class  rests  only  on  a  very- 
forced  explanation  of  canon  five  of  Neocses- 
area.  The  second  class,  the  hearers,  audi- 
entes,  rests  on  better  evidence.  These  were 
not  allowed  to  stay  while  the  Holy  Mysteries 
were  celebrated,  and  their  expulsion  gave  rise 
to  the  distinction  between  the  "  Mass  of  the 
Catechumens  "  (llissa  Catechumenorum)  and 
the  "  Mass  of  the  Faithful "  (Missa  Fidelium). 
Nor  were  they  suffered  to  hear  the  Creed  or 
the  Our  Father.  Writers  who  multiply  the 
classes  insert  here  some  who  knelt  and  prayed, 
called  Prostrati  or  Genuflectentes  (the  same 
name  as  was  given  to  one  of  the  grades  of 
penitence). 

(Edw.  H.  Plumptre  in  Diet.  Christ.  Antiq. 
s.  v.  Catechumens.) 

After  these  stages  had  been  traversed  each 
with  its  appropriate  instruction,  the  catechu- 
mens gave  in  their  names  as  applicants  for 
baptism,  and  were  known  accordingly  as  Gom- 
petentes  (o-waiTowrcs).  This  was  done  com- 
monly at  the  beginning  of  the  Quadragesimal 
fast,  and  the  instruction,  carried  on  through 
the  whole  of  that  period,  was  fuller  and  more 
public  in  its  nature  (Cyril  Hieros.  Catech.  i. 
5  ;  Hieron.  Ep.  61,  ad  Pammach.  c.  4).  To 
catechumens  in  this  stage  the  great  articles  of 
the  Creed,  the  nature  of  the  Sacraments,  the 


penitential  discipline  of  the  Church,  were  ex- 
plained, as  in  the  Catechetical  Lectures  of 
Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  with  dogmatic  precision. 
Special  examinations  and  inquiries  into  char- 
acter were  made  at  intervals  during  the  forty 
days.  It  was  a  time  for  fasting  and  watching 
and  prayer  (Constt.  Apost.  viii.  5  ;  4  C.  Carth. 
c.  85  ;  Tertull.  De  Bapt.  c.  20;  Cyril.  1.  c.)  and, 
in  the  case  of  those  who  were  married,  of  the 
strictest  continence  (August.  De  fide  et  oper. 
v.  8).  Those  who  passed  through  the  ordeal 
were  known  as  the  perfectiores  (reXuonepoi)  the 
electi,  or  in  the  nomenclature  of  the  Eastern 
Church  as  (ia-KTit,6fxevoi  or  ^um^d/tevoi,  the  pres- 
ent participle  being  used  of  course  with  a  fut- 
ure or  gerundial  sense.  Their  names  were 
inscribed  as  such  in  the  album  or  register  of 
the  church.  They  were  taught,  but  not  till  a 
few  days  before  their  baptism,  the  Creed  and 
the  Lord's  Prayer  which  they  were  to  use  after 
it.  The  periods  for  this  registration  varied, 
naturally  enough,  in  different  churches.  At 
Jerusalem  it  was  done  on  the  second  (Cyril. 
Gatech.  iii.),  in  Africa  on  the  fourth  Sunday  in 
Lent  (August.  Serm.  213),  and  this  was  the 
time  at  which  the  candidate,  if  so  disposed, 
might  lay  aside  his  old  heathen  or  Jewish 
name  and  take  one  more  specifically  Christian 
(Socrat.  H.  E.  vii.  21).  .  .  .  It  is  only  nec- 
essary to  notice  here  that  the  Sacramentum 
Catechumenorum  of  which  Augustine  speaks 
(De  Peccat.  Merit,  ii.  26)  as  given  apparently 
at  or  about  the  time  of  their  first  admission 
by  imposition  of  hands,  was  probably  the 
cvXoytat  or  panis  benedictus,  and  not,  as  Bing- 
ham and  Angusti  maintain,  the  salt  which  was 
given  with  milk  and  honey  after  baptism. 


CANON  XV. 

On  account  of  the  great  disturbance  and  discords  that  occur,  it  is  decreed  that  the 
custom  prevailing  in  certain  places  contrary  to  the  Canon,  must  wholly  be  done  away ; 
so  that  neither  bishop,  presbyter,  nor  deacon  shall  pass  from  city  to  city.  And  if  any 
one,  after  this  decree  of  the  holy  and  great  Synod,  shall  attempt  any  such  thing,  or  con- 
tinue in  any  such  course,  his  proceedings  shall  be  utterly  void,  and  he  shall  be  restored 
to  the  Church  for  which  he  was  ordained  bishop  or  presbyter. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XV. 
Neither  bishoji,  presbyter,  nor  deacon  shall 
pass  from  city  to  city.     But  they  shall  be  sent 
back,  should  they  attempt  to  do  so,  to  the  Churches 
in  which  they  were  ordained. 

Hefele. 
The  translation  of  a  bishop,  priest,  or  dea- 
con from  one  church  to  another,  had  already 


been  forbidden  in  the  primitive  Church. 
Nevertheless,  several  translations  had  taken 
place,  and  even  at  the  Council  of  Nice  several 
eminent  men  were  present  who  had  left  their 
first  bishoprics  to  take  others  :  thus  Eusebius, 
Bishop  of  Nicomedia,  had  been  before  Bishop 
of  Berytus  ;  Eustathius,  Bishop  of  Antioch, 
had  been  before  Bishop  of  Berrhcea  in  Syria. 
The  Council  of  Nice  thought  it  necessary  to 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


33 


forbid  in  future  these  translations,  and  to  de- 
clare them  invalid.  The  chief  reason  of  this 
prohibition  was  found  in  the  irregularities 
and  disputes  occasioned  by  such  change  of 
sees ;  but  even  if  such  practical  difficulties 
had  not  arisen,  the  whole  doctrinal  idea,  so 
to  speak,  of  the  relationship  between  a  cleric 
and  the  church  to  which  he  had  been  or- 
dained, namely,  the  contracting  of  a  mystical 
marriage  between  them,  would  be  opposed  to 
any  translation  or  change.  In  341  the  Synod 
of  Antioch  renewed,  in  its  twenty-first  canon, 
the  prohibition  passed  by  the  Council  of  Nice  ; 
but  the  interest  of  the  Church  often  rendered 
it  necessary  to  make  exceptions,  as  happened 


in  the  case  of  St.  Chrysostom.  These  excep- 
tional cases  increased  almost  immediately 
after  the  holding  of  the  Council  of  Nice,  so 
that  in  382,  St.  Gregory  of  Nazianzum  con- 
sidered this  law  among  those  which  had  long 
been  abrogated  by  custom.  It  was  more 
strictly  observed  in  the  Latin  Church ;  and 
even  Gregory's  contemporary,  Pope  Damasus, 
declared  himself  decidedly  in  favour  of  the 
rule  of  Nice. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici.  Decretum,  Pars  II.  Causa  VII,  Q.  1, 
c,  xix. 


EXCUESUS  ON  THE  TRANSLATION  OF  BISHOPS. 

There  are  few  points  upon  which  the  discipline  of  the  Church  has  so  completely  changed 
as  that  which  regulated,  or  rather  which  forbade,  the  translation  of  a  bishop  from  the  see  for 
which  he  was  consecrated  to  some  other  diocese.  The  grounds  on  which  such  prohibition 
rested  were  usually  that  such  changes  were  the  outcome  of  ambition,  and  that  if  tolerated 
the  result  would  be  that  smaller  and  less  important  sees  would  be  despised,  and  that  there 
would  be  a  constant  temptation  to  the  bishops  of  such  sees  to  make  themselves  popular  with 
the  important  persons  in  other  dioceses  with  the  hope  of  promotion.  Besides  this  objection 
to  translation,  St.  Athanasius  mentions  a  spiritual  one,  that  the  diocese  was  the  bishop's 
bride,  and  that  to  desert  it  and  take  another  was  an  act  of  unjustifiable  divorce,  and  subse- 
quent adultery.1  Canon  XIV.  of  the  Apostolic  Canons  does  not  forbid  the  practice  abso- 
lutely, but  allows  it  for  just  cause,  and  although  the  Council  of  Nice  is  more  stringent  so 
far  as  its  words  are  concerned,  apparently  forbidding  translation  under  any  circumstances, 
yet,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  that  very  council  did  allow  and  approve  a  translation.2  The  general 
feeling,  however,  of  the  early  Church  was  certainly  very  strong  against  all  such  changes  of 
Episcopal  cure,  and  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  chief  reason  why  St.  Gregory  Nazianzen 
resigned  the  Presidency  of  the  First  Council  of  Constantinople,  was  because  he  had  been 
translated  from  his  obscure  see  Sasima  (not  Nazianzum  as  Socrates  and  Jerome  say)  to  the 
Imperial  City.3 

From  the  canons  of  some  provincial  councils,  and  especially  from  those  of  the  Third  and 
of  the  Fourth  Council  of  Carthage,  it  is  evident  that  despite  the  conciliar  and  papal  pro- 
hibitions, translations  did  take  place,  being  made  by  the  authority  of  the  provincial  Synods, 
and  without  the  consent  of  the  pope,4  but  it  is  also  evident  that  this  authority  was  too  weak, 
and  that  the  aid  of  the  secular  power  had  often  to  be  invoked. 

This  course,  of  having  the  matter  decided  by  the  synod,  was  exactly  in  accordance  with 
the  Apostolic  Canon  (no.  xiv.).  In  this  manner,  for  example,  Alexander  was  translated  from 
Cappadocia  to  Jerusalem,  a  translation  made,  so  it  is  narrated,  in  obedience  to  heavenly 
revelation. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  the  Nicene  Canon  does  not  forbid  Provincial  Councils  to  translate 


1  Athanas.  Apol.  ij. 

2  Sozom.    IT.  E.  I.  2. 

3  By  no  one  has  this  whole  matter  of  the  translation  of  bishops 
been  more  carefully  and  thoroughly  treated  than  by  Thomassinus, 
and  in  what  follows  I  shall  use  his  discussion  as  a  thesaurus  of 
facts.  The  title  of  his  book  is  Ancienne  et  Kouvclle  Discipline 
de  VEglise  (There  is  also  an  edition  in  Latin).  In  the  Third  Part, 
and  the  Second  Book, 

Chapter  LX.  treats  of  "  Translations  of  bishops  in  the  Latin 
Church  during  the  first  five  centuries." 

VOL.  XIV.  D 


Chapter  LXI.  "  Translations  in  the  Eastern  Church,  during 
the  first  five  centuries." 

Chapter  LXLT.  "Translation  of  bishops  and  bishoprics  be- 
tween the  years  five  hundred  and  eight  hundred." 

Chapter  LXIII.  "Translation  under  the  empire  of  Charle- 
magne and  his  descendants." 

Chapter  LXIV.  "Translation  of  bishops  after  the  year  one 
thousand." 

Of  all  this  I  can  in  the  text  give  but  a  brief  resume". 

4  Thomassin.  I.  c.  lx.  viij. 


34 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


bishops,  but  forbids  bishops  to  translate  themselves,  and  the  author  of  the  tract  Be  Transla- 
tionibus  in  the  Jus  Orient,  (i.  293,  Git.  Hacldon.  Art.  "Bishop,"  Smith  and  Cheetham,  Diet. 
Ghr.  Antiq.)  sums  up  the  matter  tersely  in  the  statement  that  f/  tteTa/?ao-is  kckw\vtm}  oi  prjv  i'j 
IMerdSeais :  i.e.,  the  thing  prohibited  is  "  transmigration  "  (which  arises  from  the  bishop  himself, 
from  selfish  motives)  not  "  translation  "  (wherein  the  will  of  God  and  the  good  of  the  Church 
is  the  ruling  cause) ;  the  "  going,"  not  the  "  being  taken  "  to  another  see.  And  this  was  the 
practice  both  of  East  and  West,  for  many  centuries.  Roman  Catholic  writers  have  tried  to 
prove  that  translations,  at  least  to  the  chief  sees,  required  the  papal  consent,  but  Thomas- 
sinus,  considering  the  case  of  St.  Meletius  having  translated  St.  Gregory  of  Nazianzum  to 
Constantinople,  admits  that  in  so  doing  he  "  would  only  have  followed  the  example  of  many 
great  bishops  of  the  first  ages,  when  usage  had  not  yet  reserved  translations  to  the  first  see 
of  the  Church.  "  1 

But  the  same  learned  author  frankly  confesses  that  in  France,  Spain,  and  England,  trans- 
lations were  made  until  the  ninth  century  without  consulting  the  pope  at  all,  by  bishops  and 
kings.  When,  however,  from  grounds  of  simple  ambition,  Anthimus  was  translated  from 
Trebizonde  to  Constantinople,  the  religious  of  the  city  wrote  to  the  pope,  as  also  did  the 
patriarchs  of  Antioch  and  Jerusalem,  and  as  a  result  the  Emperor  Justinian  allowed  Anthi- 
mus to  be  deposed.3 

Balsamon  distinguishes  three  kinds  of  translations.  The  first,  when  a  bishop  of  marked 
learning  and  of  equal  piety  is  forced  by  a  council  to  pass  from  a  small  diocese  to  one  far 
greater  where  he  will  be  able  to  do  the  Church  the  most  important  services,  as  was  the  case 
when  St.  Gregory  of  Nazianzum  was  transferred  from  Sasima  to  Constantinople,  /xera^eo-is ; 
the  second  when  a  bishop,  whose  see  has  been  laid  low  by  the  barbarians,  is  transferred  to 
another  see  which  is  vacant,  /xera/Jaa-ts  ;  and  the  third  when  a  bishop,  either  having  or  lacking 
a  see,  seizes  on  a  bishopric  which  is  vacant,  on  his  own  proper  authority  cW/?ao-is.  And  it  is 
this  last  which  the  Council  of  Sardica  punishes  so  severely.  In  all  these  remarks  of  Balsa- 
mon there  is  no  mention  of  the  imperial  power. 

Demetrius  Chomatenus,  however,  who  was  Archbishop  of  Thessalonica,  and  wrote  a 
series  of  answers  to  Cabasilas,  Archbishop  of  Durazzo,  says  that  by  the  command  of  the 
Emperor  a  bishop,  elected  and  confirmed,  and  even  ready  to  be  ordained  for  a  diocese,  may 
be  forced  to  take  the  charge  of  another  one  which  is  more  important,  and  where  his  services 
will  be  incomparably  more  useful  to  the  public.  Thus  we  read  in  the  Book  of  Eastern  Law 
that  "If  a  Metropolitan  with  his  synod,  moved  by  a  praiseworthy  cause  and  probable  pre- 
text, shall  give  his  approbation  to  the  translation  of  a  bishop,  this  can,  without  doubt,  be 
done,  for  the  good  of  souls  and  for  the  better  administration  of  the  church's  affairs,  etc."3 
This  was  adopted  at  a  synod  held  by  the  patriarch  Manuel  at  Constantinople,  in  the  pres- 
ence of  the  imperial  commissioners. 

The  same  thing  appears  also  in  the  synodal  response  of  the  patriarch  Michael,  which 
only  demands  for  translation  the  authority  of  the  Metropolitan  and  "the  greatest  authority 
of  the  Church."4  But,  soon  after  this,  translation  became  the  rule,  and  not  the  exception 
both  in  East  and  West. 

It  was  in  vain  thai  Simeon,  Archbishop  of  Thessalonica,  in  the  East  raised  his  voice  against 
the  constant  translations  made  by  the  secular  power,  and  the  Emperors  of  Constantinople 
were  often  absolute  masters  of  the  choice  and  translations  of  bishops  ;  and  Thomassinus 
sums  up  the  matter,  "At  the  least  we  are  forced  to  the  conclusion  that  no  translations  could 


1  Thomassin,  I.  cit,  Chap.  LI.,  §  xiij. 

2  This  is  Thomassinus's  version  of  the  matter,  in  fact  the 
charge  of  heresy  was  also  made  against  Anthimus,  but  his  unca- 
nonical  translation  was  a  real  count  in  the  accusation. 


3  Juris.  Orient,  torn.  I.  p.  240,  241. 

*  Ibid.  p.  5.    I  am  not  at  all  clear  as  to  what  this  last  phrase 
means. 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


35 


be  made  without  the  consent  of  the  Emperor,  especially  when  it  was  the  See  of  Constantino- 
ple that  was  to  be  filled." 

The  same  learned  writer  continues :  "  It  was  usually  the  bishop  or  archbishop  of  another 
church  that  was  chosen  to  ascend  the  patriarchal  throne  of  the  imperial  city.  The  Kings 
of  England  often  used  this  same  power  to  appoint  to  the  Primatial  See  of  Canterbury  a 
bishop  already  approved  in  the  government  of  another  diocese."1 

In  the  West,  Cardinal  Bellarmine  disapproved  the  prevailing  custom  of  translations  and 
protested  against  it  to  his  master,  Pope  Clement  VIIL,  reminding  him  that  they  were  con- 
trary to  the  canons  and  contrary  to  the  usage  of  the  Ancient  Church,  except  in  cases  of 
necessity  and  of  great  gain  to  the  Church.  The  pope  entirely  agreed  with  these  wise  obser- 
vations, and  promised  that  he  would  himself  make,  and  would  urge  princes  to  make,  transla- 
tions only  "  with  difficulty."  But  translations  are  made  universally,  all  the  world  over,  to-day, 
and  no  attention  whatever  is  paid  to  the  ancient  canons  and  discipline  of  the  Church.2 


CANON  XVI. 

Neither  presbyters,  nor  deacons,  nor  any  others  enrolled  among  the  clergy,  who, 
not  having  the  fear  of  God  before  their  eyes,  nor  regarding  the  ecclesiastical  Canon, 
shall  recklessly  remove  from  their  own  church,  ought  by  any  means  to  be  received  by 
another  church  ;  but  every  constraint  should  be  applied  to  restore  them  to  their  own 
parishes ;  and,  if  they  will  not  go,  they  must  be  excommunicated.  And  if  anyone  shall 
dare  surreptitiously  to  carry  off  and  in  his  own  Church  ordain  a  man  belonging  to 
another,  without  the  consent  of  his  own  proper  bishop,  from  whom  although  he  was 
enrolled  in  the  clergy  list  he  has  seceded,  let  the  ordination  be  void. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XVI. 


Such  presbyters  or  deacons  as  desert  their 
own  Church  are  not  to  be  admitted  into  another, 
but  are  to  be  sent  back  to  their  own  diocese. 
But  if  any  bishop  should  ordain  one  who  be- 
longs to  another  Church  without  the  consent  of 
his  own  bishop,  the  ordination  shall  be  can- 
celled, 

"  Parish  "  in  this  canon,  as  so  often  else- 
where, means  "  diocese," 

Balsamon. 

It  seemed  right  that  the  clergy  should  have 
no  power  to  move  from  city  to  city  and  to 
change  their  canonical  residence  without  let- 
ters dimissory  from  the  bishop  who  ordained 
them.  But  such  clerics  as  are  called  by  the 
bishops  who  ordained  them  and  cannot  be 
persuaded  to  return,  are  to  be  separated  from 
communion,  that  is  to  say,  not  to  be  allowed 
to  concelebrate  {awizpovpydv)  with  them,  for 
this  is  the  meaning  of  "  excommunicated  "  in 


1  Thomassin.  lib  cit.,  chap.  LXIV.  §  x. 

2 1  'believe  this  is  true  of  all  churches,  Catholic  and  Protestant, 
having  an  episcopal  form  of  government  (including  the  Protestant 
Church  of  Sweden,  and  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church),  with  the 


this  place,  and  not  that  they  should  not  enter 
the  church  nor  receive  the  sacraments.  This 
decree  agrees  with  canon  xv.  of  the  Apos- 
tolical canons,  which  provides  that  such  shall 
not  celebrate  the  liturgy.  Canon  xvj.  of  the 
same  Apostolical  canons  further  provides  that 
if  a  bishop  receive  a  cleric  coming  to  him 
from  another  diocese  without  his  bishop's  let- 
ters dimissory,  and  shall  ordain  him,  such  a 
bishop  shall  be  separated.  From  all  this  it  is 
evident  that  the  Chartophylax  of  the  Great 
Church  for  the  time  does  rightly  in  refusing 
to  allow  priests  ordained  in  other  dioceses  to 
offer  the  sacrifice  unless  they  bring  with  them 
letters  commendatory  and  dimissory  from 
those  who  ordained  them. 

Zonaras  had  also  in  his  Scholion  given  the 
same  explanation  of  the  canon. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  divided  into  two.  Decretum.  Pars 
II,  Causa  VII.  Qusest.  I.  c.  xxiij.  ;  and  Pars 
I.  Dist.  LXXI,  c.  iij. 


exception  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States, 
in  which  the  ancient  prohibition  of  the  translation  of  diocesan 
bishops  is  observed  in  all  its  Nicene  strictness. 


D  3 


36  I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


CANON  XVII. 

Foeasmuch  as  many  enrolled  among  the  Clergy,  following  covetousness  and  lust  of 
gain,  have  forgotten  the  divine  Scripture,  which  says,  "  He  hath  not  given  his  money 
upon  usury,"  and  in  lending  money  ask  the  hundredth  of  the  sum  [as  monthly  interest], 
the  holy  and  great  Synod  thinks  it  just  that  if  after  this  decree  any  one  be  found  to 
receive  usury,  whether  he  accomplish  it  by  secret  transaction  or  otherwise,  as  by  de- 
manding the  whole  and  one  half,  or  by  using  any  other  contrivance  whatever  for  filthy 
lucre's  sake,  he  shall  be  deposed  from  the  clergy  and  his  name  stricken  from  the  list. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XVII. 


If  anyone  shall  receive  usury  or  150  per 
cent,  he  shall  be  cast  forth  and  deposed,  accord- 
ing to  this  decree  of  the  Church. 

Van  Espen. 

Although  the  canon  expresses  only  these  two 
species  of  usury,  if  we  bear  in  mind  the 
grounds  on  which  the  prohibition  was  made, 
it  will  be  manifest  that  every  kind  of  usury  is 


canon  sent  by  the  Orientals  to  the  Sixth  Coun- 
cil of  Carthage  is  in  no  respect  alien  to  the 
true  intent  of  the  canon  ;  for  in  this  version 
no  mention  is  made  of  any  particular  kind  of 
usury,  but  generally  the  penalty  is  assigned 
to  any  clerics  who  "  shall  be  found  after  this 
decree  taking  usury "  or  thinking  out  any 
other  scheme  for  the  sake  of  filthy  lucre. 

This  Canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  in  the  first  part  of  the  Decretum,  in 
Dionysius's   version.     Dist.    xlvii,    c.   ii,    and 


forbidden  to  clerics  and  under  any  circum-  i  again  in  Isidore's  version  in  Pars  II,  Causa 
stances,  and  therefore  the  translation  of  this !  xiv.  Quses.  iv.,  c.  viii. 

EXCURSUS  ON  USURY. 

The  famous  canonist  Van  Espen  defines  usury  thus  :  "  Usura  definitur  lucrum  ex  mutuo 
exactum  aut  speratum  ; " x  and  then  goes  on  to  defend  the  proposition  that,  "  Usury  is  for- 
bidden by  natural,  by  divine,  and  by  human  law.  The  first  is  proved  thus.  Natural  law,  as 
far  as  its  first  principles  are  concerned,  is  contained  in  the  decalogue  ;  but  usury  is  prohibit- 
ed in  the  decalogue,  inasmuch  as  theft  is  prohibited ;  and  this  is  the  opinion  of  the  Master 
of  the  Sentences,  of  St.  Bonaventura,  of  St.  Thomas  and  of  a  host  of  others  :  for  by  the 
name  of  theft  in  the  Law  all  unlawful  taking  of  another's  goods  is  prohibited  ;  but  usury  is 
an  unlawful,  etc."  For  a  proof  of  usury's  being  contrary  to  divine  law  he  cites  Ex.  xxii.  25, 
and  Deut.  xxiii.  29  ;  and  from  the  New  Testament  Luke  vi.  34.  "  The  third  assertion  is 
proved  thus.  Usury  is  forbidden  by  human  law  :  The  First  Council  of  Nice  in  Canon  VII. 
deposed  from  the  clergy  and  from  all  ecclesiastical  rank,  clerics  who  took  usury ;  and  the 
same  thing  is  the  case  with  an  infinite  number  of  councils,  in  fact  with  nearly  all  e.  g.  Elvira, 
ij,  Aries  j,  Carthage  iij,  Tours  iij,  etc.  Nay,  even  the  pagans  themselves  formerly  forbid  it 
by  their  laws."  He  then  quotes  Tacitus  (Annal.  lib.  v.),  and  adds,  "with  what  severe  laws 
the  French  Kings  coerced  usurers  is  evident  from  the  edicts  of  St.  Louis,  Philip  IV.,  Charles 
IX.,  Henry  III,  etc." 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  Van  Espen  in  the  foregoing  has  accurately  represented  and 
without  any  exaggeration  the  universal  opinion  of  all  teachers  of  morals,  theologians,  doctors, 
Popes,  and  Councils  of  the  Christian  Church  for  the  first  fifteen  hundred  years.  All  interest 
exacted  upon  loans  of  money  was  looked  upon  as  usury,  and  its  reception  was  esteemed  a 
form  of  theft  and  dishonesty.  Those  who  wish  to  read  the  history  of  the  matter  in  all  its  de- 
tails are  referred  to  Bossuet's  work  on  the  subject,  Traite  de  I'Usure,2  where  they  will  find 

1  Van  Espen.  DUserMio  de  Usura,  Art.  I.  2Bossuet,  (Euvres  Comp.  xxxj. 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325  3? 


the  old,  traditional  view  of  the  Christian  religion  defended  by  one  thoroughly  acquainted 
with  all  that  could  be  said  on  the  other  side. 

The  glory  of  inventing  the  new  moral  code  on  the  subject,  by  which  that  which  before  was 
looked  upon  as  mortal  sin  has  been  transfigured  into  innocence,  if  not  virtue,  belongs  to 
John  Calvin  !  He  made  the  modern  distinction  between  "interest"  and  "usury,"  and  was 
the  first  to  write  in  defence  of  this  then  new-fangled  refinement  of  casuistry.1  Luther 
violently  opposed  him,  and  Melancthon  also  kept  to  the  old  doctrine,  though  less  violently 
(as  was  to  be  expected) ;  to-day  the  whole  Christian  West,  Protestant  and  Catholic  alike,  stake 
their  salvation  upon  the  truth  of  Calvin's  distinction  !  Among  Koman  Catholics  the  new 
doctrine  began  to  be  defended  about  the  beginning  of  the  eighteenth  century,  the  work  of 
Scipio  Maffei,  DeW  impiego  dell  clanaro,  written  on  the  laxer  side,  having  attracted  a  wide- 
spread attention.  The  Ballerini  affirm  that  the  learned  pope  Benedict  XIV.  allowed  books 
defending  the  new  morals  to  be  dedicated  to  him,  and  in  1830  the  Congregation  of  the  Holy 
Office  with  the  approval  of  the  reigning  Pontiff,  Pius  VIII.,  decided  that  those  who  considered 
the  taking  of  interest  allowed  by  the  state  law  justifiable,  were  "not  to  be  disturbed."  It  is 
entirely  disingenuous  to  attempt  to  reconcile  the  modern  with  the  ancient  doctrine  ;  the 
Fathers  expressly  deny  that  the  State  has  any  power  to  make  the  receiving  of  interest  just  or 
to  fix  its  rate,  there  is  but  one  ground  for  those  to  take  who  accept  the  new  teaching,  viz. 
that  all  the  ancients,  while  true  on  the  moral  principle  that  one  must  not  defraud  his  neigh- 
bour nor  take  unjust  advantage  of  his  necessity,  were  in  error  concerning  the  facts,  in  that 
they  supposed  that  money  was  barren,  an  opinion  which  the  Schoolmen  also  held,  following 
Aristotle.  This  we  have  found  in  modern  times,  and  amid  modern  circumstances,  to  be  an 
entire  error,  as  Grury,  the  famous  modern  casuist,  well  says,  "fructum  producitet  multiplica- 
tur  per  se." 2 

That  the  student  may  have  it  in  his  power  to  read  the  Patristic  view  of  the  matter,  I  give 
a  list  of  the  passages  most  commonly  cited,  together  with  a  review  of  the  conciliar  action,  for 
all  which  I  am  indebted  to  a  masterly  article  by  Wharton  B.  Marriott  in  Smith  and  Cheet- 
ham's  Dictionary  of  Christian  Antiquities  (s.  v.  Usury). 

Although  the  conditions  of  the  mercantile  community  in  the  East  and  the  West  differed 
materially  in  some  respects,  the  fathers  of  the  two  churches  are  equally  explicit  and  system- 
atic in  their  condemnation  of  the  practice  of  usury.  Among  those  belonging  to  the  Greek 
church  we  find  Athanasius  (Expos,  in  Ps.  xiv) ;  Basil  the  Great  (Horn,  in  Ps.  xiv).  Gregory  of 
Nazianzum  (Oral.  xiv.  in  Patrem  tacentem).  Gregory  of  Nyssa  (Orat.  cont.  Usurarios);  Cyril  of 
Jerusalem  (Gatech.  iv.  c.  37),  Epiphanius  (adv.  Haeres.  Epilog,  c.  24),  Chrysostom  (Horn.  xli. 
in  Genes),  and  Theodoret  (Interpr.  in  Ps.  xiv.  5,  and  liv.  11).  Among  those  belonging  to  the 
Latin  church,  Hilary  of  Poitiers  (in  Ps.  xiv);  Ambrose  (de  Tobia  liber  units).  Jerome  (in  Ezech. 
vi.  18) ;  Augustine  de  Baptismo  contr.  Donatistas,  iv.  19);  Leo  the  Great  (Epist.  iii.  4),  and  Cas- 
siodorus  (in  Ps.  xiv.  10). 

The  canons  of  later  councils  differ  materially  in  relation  to  this  subject,  and  indicate  a 
distinct  tendency  to  mitigate  the  rigour  of  the  Nicasan  interdict.  That  of  the  council  of 
Carthage  of  the  year  348  enforces  the  original  prohibition,  but  without  the  penalty,  and 
grounds  the  veto  on  both  Old  and  New  Testament  authority,  "  nemo  contra  prophetas,  nemo 
contra  evangelia  facit  sine  periculo"  (Mansi,  iii.  158).  The  language,  however,  when  com- 
pared with  that  of  the  council  of  Carthage  of  the  year  419,  serves  to  suggest  that,  in  the  inter- 
val, the  lower  clergy  had  occasionally  been  found  having  recourse  to  the  forbidden  practice, 
for  the  general  terms  of  the  earlier  canon,  "ut  non  liceat  clericis  fenerari,"  are  enforced  with 

'Funk  (Zins  und  Wuclier,  p.  104)  says  that  Eck  and  Hoog-  I     ^Gtiry,  Corap.  TJieol,  Moral  (Ed.  Ballerini)  vol,  ii.  p.  Oil, 
Btraten  had  already  verbally  defended  this  distinction  at  Bologna.   | 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


greater  particularity  in  the  latter,  "Nee  omnino  cuiquam  elericorum  liceat  de  qualibet  re 
fcenus  accipere  "  (Mansi,  iv.  423).  This  supposition  is  supported  by  the  language  of  the 
council  of  Orleans  (a.d.  538),  which  appears  to  imply  that  deacons  were  not  prohibited 
from  lending  money  at  interest,  "Et  clericus  adiaconatu,  et  supra,  pecuniam  noncommodet 
ad  usuras  "  {ib.  ix.  18).  Similarly,  at  the  second  council  of  Trullanum  (a.d.  692)  a  like 
liberty  would  appear  to  have  been  recognised  among  the  lower  clergy  (Hardouin,  iii.  1663). 
While,  again,  the  Nictean  canon  requires  the  immediate  deposition  of  the  ecclesiastic  found 
guilty  of  the  practice,  the  Apostolical  canon  enjoins  that  such  deposition  is  to  take  place 
only  after  he  has  been  admonished  and  has  disregarded  the  admonition. 

Generally  speaking,  the  evidence  points  to  the  conclusion  that  the  Church  imposed  no 
penalty  on  the  layman.  St.  Basil  (Epist.  clxxxviii.  can.  12),  says  that  a  usurer  may  even  be 
admitted  to  orders,  provided  he  gives  his  acquired  wealth  to  the  poor  and  abstains  for  the 
future  from  the  pursuit  of  gain  (Migne,  Patrol.  Orcec.  xxxii.  275).  Gregory  of  Nyssa  says 
that  usury,  unlike  theft,  the  deseci'ation  of  tombs,  and  sacrilege  (IcpocrvXia),  is  allowed  to  pass 
unpunished,  although  among  the  things  forbidden  by  Scripture,  nor  is  a  candidate  at  ordina- 
tion ever  asked  whether  or  no  he  has  been  guilty  of  the  practice  (Migne,  ib.  xlv.  233).  A 
letter  of  Sidonius  Apollinaris  (Epist.  vi.  24)  relating  an  experience  of  his  friend  Maximus, 
appears  to  imply  that  no  blame  attached  to  lending  money  at  the  legal  rate  of  interest,  and 
that  even  a  bishop  might  be  a  creditor  on  those  terms.  We  find  also  Desideratus,  bishop  of 
Verdun,  when  applying  for  a  loan  to  king  Theodebert,  for  the  relief  of  his  impoverished  dio- 
cese, promising  repayment,  "  cumusurislegitimis,"  an  expression  which  would  seem  to  imply 
that  in  the  Gallican  church  usury  was  recognised  as  lawful  under  certain  conditions  (Greg. 
Tur.  Hist.  Franc,  iii.  34).  So  again  a  letter  (Epist.  ix.  38)  of  Gregory  the  Great  seems  to 
shew  that  he  did  not  regard  the  payment  of  interest  for  money  advanced  by  one  layman  to 
another  as  unlawful.  But  on  the  other  hand,  we  find  in  what  is  known  as  archbishop  Theo- 
dore's "Penitential"  (circ.  a.d.  690)  what  appears  to  be  a  general  law  on  the  subject,  en- 
joining "  Sie  quis  usuras  undecunque  exegerit  .  .  .  tres  annos  in  pane  et  aqua  "  (c.  xxv. 
3) ;  a  penance  again  enjoined  in  the  Penitential  of  Egbert  of  York(c.  ii.  30).  In  like  manner, 
the  legates,  George  and  Theophylact,  in  reporting  their  proceedings  in  England  to  pope 
Adrian  I.  (a.d.  787),  state  that  they  have  prohibited  "usurers,"  and  cite  the  authority  of  the 
Psalmist  and  St.  Augustine  (Haddan  and  Stubbs,  Cone.  iii.  457).  The  councils  of  Mayence, 
Kheiins,  and  Chalons,  in  the  year  813,  and  that  of  Aix  in  the  year  816,  seem  to  have  laid  down 
the  same  prohibition  as  binding  both  on  the  clergy  and  the  laity  (Hardouin,  Cone.  iv.  1011, 
1020,  1033,  1100). 

Muratori,  in  his  dissertation  on  the  subject  (Antichitd,  vol.  i.),  observes  that  "we  do  not 
know  exactly  how  commerce  was  transacted  in  the  five  preceding  centuries,"  and  conse- 
quently are  ignorant  as  to  the  terms  on  which  loans  of  money  were  effected. 

CANON  XVIII. 

It  has  come  to  the  knowledge  of  the  holy  and  great  Synod  that,  in  some  districts 
and  cities,  the  deacons  administer  the  Eucharist  to  the  presbyters,  whereas  neither 
canon  nor  custom  permits  that  they  who  have  no  right  to  offer  should  give  the  Body  of 
Christ  to  them  that  do  offer.  And  this  also  has  been  made  known,  that  certain  deacons 
now  touch  the  Eucharist  even  before  the  bishops.  Let  all  such  practices  be  utterly  done 
away,  and  let  the  deacons  remain  within  their  own  bounds,  knowing  that  they  are  the 
ministers  of  the  bishop  and  the  inferiors  of  the  presbyters.  Let  them  receive  the 
Eucharist  according  to  their  order,  after  the  presbyters,  and  let  either  the  bishop  or  the 
presbyter  administer  to  them.  Eurthermore,  let  not  the  deacons  sit  among  the  presby- 
ters, for  that  is  contrary  to  canon  and  order.  And  if,  after  this  decree,  any  one  shall 
refuse  to  obey,  let  him  be  deposed  from  the  diaconate. 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


39 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XVIII. 

Deacons  must  abide  within  their  oam  bounds. 
They  shall  not  administer  the  Eucharist  to 
presbyters,  nor  touch  it  before  them,  nor  sit 
among  the  presbyters.  For  all  this  is  contrary 
to  canon,  and  to  decent  order. 

Van  Espen. 

Four  excesses  of  deacons  this  canon  con- 
demns, at  least  indirectly.  The  first  was  that 
they  gave  the  holy  Communion  to  presbyters. 
To  understand  more  easily  the  meaning  of  the 
canon  it  must  be  remembered  that  the  refer- 
ence here  is  not  to  the  presbyters  who  were 
sacrificing  at  the  altar  but  to  those  who  were 
offering  together  with  the  bishop  who  was 
sacrificing ;  by  a  rite  not  unlike  that  which 
to-day  takes  place,  when  the  newly  ordained 
presbyters  or  bishops  celebrate  mass  with  the 
ordaining  bishop  ;  and  this  rite  in  old  times 
was  of  daily  occurrence,  for  a  full  account  of 
which  see  Morinus  De  SS.  Ordinat.  P.  III. 
Exercit.  viij.  .  .  .  The  present  canon 
does  not  take  away  from  deacons  the  author- 
ity to  distribute  the  Eucharist  to  laymen,  or 
to  the  minor  clergy,  but  only  reproves  their 
insolence  and  audacity  in  presuming  to  ad- 
minister to  presbyters  who  were  concelebrat- 
ing  with  the   bishop  or  another   presbyter. 

The  second  abuse  was  that  certain  deacons 
touched  the  sacred  gifts  before  the  bishop. 
The  vulgar  version  of  Isidore  reads  for 
"touched"  "received,"  a  meaning  which  Bal- 
samon  and  Zonaras  also  adopt,  and  unless  the 
Greek  word,  which  signifies  "to  touch,"  is  con- 
trary to  this  translation,  it  seems  by  no  means 
to  be  alien  to  the  context  of  the  canon. 

"Let  them  receive  the  Eucharist  according 
to  their  order,  after  the  presbyters,  and  let  the 
bishop  or  the  presbyter  administer  to  them." 
In  these  words  it  is  implied  that  some  deacons 
had  presumed  to  receive  Holy  Communion  be- 
fore the  presbyters,  and  this  is  the  third  excess 
of  the  deacon  which  is  condemned  by  the  Synod. 

And  lastly,  the  fourth  excess  was  that  they 
took  a  place  among  the  presbyters  at  the  very 
time  of  the  sacrifice,  or  "  at  the  holy  altar,"  as 
Balsamon  observes. 

From  this  canon  we  see  that  the  Nicene 
fathers  entertained  no  doubt  that  the  faithful 
in  the  holy  Communion  truly  received  "  the 
body  of  Christ."  Secondly,  that  that  was 
"  offered  "  in  the  church,  which  is  the  word 
by  which  sacrifice  is  designated  in  the  New 
Testament,  and  therefore  it  was  at  that  time  a 


fixed  tradition  that  there  was  a  sacrifice  in 
which  the  body  of  Christ  was  offered.  Thirdly 
that  not  to  all,  nor  even  to  deacons,  but  only 
to  bishops  and  presbyters  was  given  the  power 
of  offering.  And  lastly,  that  there  was  recog- 
nized a  fixed  hierarchy  in  the  Church,  made 
up  of  bishops  and  presbyters  and  deacons  in 
subordination  to  these. 

Of  course  even  at  that  early  date  there  was 
nothing  new  in  this  doctrine  of  the  Eucharist. 
St.  Ignatius  more  than  a  century  and  a  half 
before,  wrote  as  follows :  "  But  mark  ye  those 
who  hold  strange  doctrine  touching  the  grace 
of  Jesus  Christ  which  came  to  us,  hoAV  that 
they  are  contrary  to  the  mind  of  God.  They 
have  no  care  for  love,  none  for  the  widow, 
none  for  the  orphan,  none  for  the  afflicted, 
none  for  the  prisoner,  none  for  the  hungry 
or  thirsty.  They  abstain  from  eucharist 
(thanksgiving)  and  prayer,  because  they  al- 
low not  that  the  Eucharist  is  the  flesh  of  our 
Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  which  flesh  suffered  for 
our  sins,  and  which  the  Father  of  his  good- 
ness raised  up."  l 

In  one  point  the  learned  scholiast  just 
quoted  has  most  seriously  understated  his 
case.  He  says  that  the  wording  of  the  canon 
shews  "  that  the  Nicene  fathers  entertained 
no  doubt  that  the  faithful  in  the  holy  Com- 
munion truly  received  '  the  body  of  Christ.'  " 
Now  this  statement  is  of  course  true  because 
it  is  included  in  what  the  canon  says,  but  the 
doctrinal  statement  which  is  necessarily  con- 
tained in  the  canon  is  that  "the  body  of 
Christ  is  given  "  by  the  minister  to  the  faith- 
ful. This  doctrine  is  believed  by  all  Catho- 
lics and  by  Lutherans,  but  is  denied  by  all 
other  Protestants  ;  those  Calvinists  who  kept 
most  nearly  to  the  ordinary  Catholic  phrase- 
ology only  admitting  that  "the  sacrament  of 
the  Body  of  Christ "  was  given  in  the  supper  by 
the  minister,  while  "  the  body  of  Christ,"  they 
taught,  was  present  only  in  the  soul  of  the 
worthy  communicant  (and  in  no  way  con- 
nected with  the  form  of  bread,  which  was  but 
the  divinely  appointed  sign  and  assurance  of 
the  heavenly  gift),  and  therefore  could  not  be 
"  given  "  by  the  priest. z 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Decretum.  Pars  I.  Dist.  XCIIL,  c. 
xiv. 


1  Ifrnat.  Ad  Smyr.  §  vi.  Lightfoot's  translation.  Apost.  Fath. 
Vol.  II.  Sec.  I.  p.  569. 

2Cf.  Art.  xxviij.  of  the  "Articles  of  Religion "  of  the  Church 
of  England,  which  declares  that  "The  Body  of  Christ  is  given, 
taken,  and  eaten  in  the  Supper,"  etc. 


40 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


CANON  XIX. 

Concerning  the  Paulianists  who  have  flown  for  refuge  to  the  Catholic  Church,  it  has 
been  decreed  that  they  must  by  all  means  be  rebaptized ;  and  if  any  of  them  who  in 
past  time  have  been  numbered  among  their  clergy  should  be  found  blameless  and  with- 
out reproach,  let  them  be  rebaptized  and  ordained  by  the  Bishop  of  the  Catholic  Church  ; 
but  if  the  examination  should  discover  them  to  be  unfit,  they  ought  to  be  deposed. 
Likewise  in  the  case  of  their  deaconesses,  and  generally  in  the  case  of  those  who  have 
been  enrolled  among  their  clergy,  let  the  same  form  be  observed.  And  we  mean  by 
deaconesses  such  as  have  assumed  the  habit,  but  who,  since  they  have  no  imposition  of 
hands,  are  to  be  numbered  only  among  the  laity. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XIX. 


Paulianists  must  be  rebaptised,  and  if  such 
as  are  clergymen  seem  to  be  blameless  let  them 
be  ordained.  If  they  do  not  seem  to  be  blame- 
less, let  them  be  deposed.  Deaconesses  who 
have  been  led  astray,  since  they  are  not  sharers 
of  ordination,  are  to  be  reckoned  among  the 
laity. 

Ffoulkes. 
(Diet.  Chr.  Ant.  s.v.  Nicsea,  Councils  of.) 
That  this  is  the  true  meaning  of  the  phrase 
6'pos  eKTe'^eu-cci,  viz.  "a  decree  lias  now  been 
made,"  is  clear  from  the  application  of  the 
words  opos  in  Canon  xvii.,  and  wpLo-ev,  in  Canon 
vi.  It  has  been  a  pure  mistake,  therefore, 
which  Bp.  Hefele  blindly  follows,  to  under- 
stand it  of  some  canon  previously  passed, 
whether  at  Aries  or  elsewhere. 

Justellus. 

Here  xeiP°^£(T^a  is  taken  for  ordination  or 
consecration,  not  for  benediction, 
for  neither  were  deaconesses,  sub-deacons, 
readers,  and  other  ministers  ordained,  but  a 
blessing  was  merely  pronounced  over  them 
by  prayer  and  imposition  of  hands. 

Aeistenus. 

Their  (the  Paulicians')  deaconesses  also, 
since  they  have  no  imposition  of  hands,  if  they 
come  over  to  the  Catholic  Church  and  are 
baptized,  are  ranked  among  the  laity. 


With   this 
agree. 


Zonaras    and    Balsamon  also 

Hefele. 

By  Paulianists  must  be  understood  the  fol- 
lowers of  Paul  of  Samosata  the  anti-Trinita- 
rian who,  about  the  year  260,  had  been  made 
bishop  of  Antioch,  but  had  been  deposed  by 
a  great  Synod  in  269.     As  Paul  of  Samosata 


was  heretical  in  his  teaching  on  the  Holy 
Trinity  the  Synod  of  Nice  applied  to  him  the 
decree  passed  by  the  council  of  Aries  in  its 
eighth  canon.  "If  anj'one  shall  come  from 
heresy  to  the  Church,  they  shall  ask  him  to 
say  the  creed  ;  and  if  they  shall  perceive  that 
he  was  baptized  into  the  Father,  and  the  Son, 
and  the  Holy  Ghost,1  he  shall  have  a  hand  laid 
on  him  only  that  he  may  receive  the  Holy 
Ghost.  But  if  in  answer  to  their  question- 
ing he  shall  not  answer  this  Trinity,  let  him 
be  baptized." 

The  Samosatans,  according  to  St.  Athana- 
sius,  named  the  Father,  Son  and  Holy  Spirit 
in  administering  baptism  (Orat.  ii,  Contra 
Arian.  No.  xliii),  but  as  they  gave  a  false 
meaning  to  the  baptismal  formula  and  did 
not  use  the  words  Son  and  Holy  Spirit  in  the 
usual  sense,  the  Council  of  Nice,  like  St.  Ath- 
anasius  himself,  considered  their  baptism  as 
invalid. 

There  is  great  difficulty  about  the  text  of 
the  clause  beginning  "  Likewise  in  the  case, 
etc.,"  and  Gelasius,  the  Prisca,  Theilo  and 
Thearistus,  (who  in  419  translated  the  canons 
of  Nice  for  the  African  bishops),  the  Pseudo- 
Isidore,  and  Gratian  have  all  followed  a  read- 
ing SiaKovcuv,  instead  of  Siclkovlo-o-wv.  This 
change  makes  all  clear,  but  many  canonists 
keep  the  ordinary  text,  including  Van  Espen, 
with  whose  interpretation    Hefele   does   not 

agree. 

■I 

The  clause  I  have  rendered  "And  we 
mean  by  deaconesses "  is  most  difficult  of 
translation.  I  give  the  original,  'E/xv^cr^/xev 
81  SiaKovicrawv  twv  iv  tuj  cr^/xari.  i^eTaadeLcrwv, 
brel  k.  t.  A.  Hefele's  translation  seems  to  me 
impossible,  by  crx*?!"-0""1  he  understands  the  list 
of  the  clergy  just  mentioned. 

1  lu  Patre  et  Filio  ct  Spiritu  Sancto  esse  baptizatum. 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


41 


EXCURSUS  ON  THE  DEACONESS  OF  THE  EARLY  CHURCH. 

It  lias  been  supposed  by  many  that  the  deaconess  of  the  Early  Church  had  an  Apostolic 
institution  and  that  its  existence  maybe  referred  to  by  St.  Paul  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Romans 
(xvi.  1)  where  he  speaks  of  Phoebe  as  being  a  8ta;<oj/os  of  the  Church  of  Cenchrea.  It  more- 
over has  been  suggested  that  the  "widows"  of  1  Tim.  v.  9  may  have  been  deaconesses,  and 
this  seems  not  unlikely  from  the  fact  that  the  age  for  the  admission  of  women  to  this  minis- 
try was  fixed  by  Tertullian  at  sixty  years  (De  Vel.  Virg.  Cap.  ix.),  and  only  changed  to 
forty,  two  centuries  later  by  the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  and  from  the  further  fact  that  these 
"  widows  "  spoken  of  by  St.  Paul  seem  to  have  had  a  vow  of  chastity,  for  it  is  expressly  said 
that  if  they  marry  they  have  "damnation,  because  they  have  cast  off  their  first  faith"  (1  Tim. 
v.  12). 

These  women  were  called  SiaKoVia-o-ai,  ^pecr/SimSe?  (which  must  be  distinguished  from  the 
fl-peo-jSure'pcu,  a  poor  class  referred  to  in  the  Apostolic  Constitutions  (ii.  28)  who  are  to  be  only 
invited  frequently  to  the  love-feasts,  while  the  Trpecr/Sirnoes  had  a  definite  allotment  of  the 
offerings  assigned  to  their  support),  xwat>  diaconissce,  presbyter  a?,  and  viduce. 

The  one  great  characteristic  of  the  deaconess  was  that  she  was  vowed  to  perpetual  chas- 
tity.1 The  Ajjostolical  Constitutions  (vi.  17)  say  that  she  must  be  a  chaste  virgin  (-Trapdevos  ayvrj) 
or  else  a  widow.  The  writer  of  the  article  "Deaconess  "  in  the  Dictionary  of  Christian  Antiq- 
uities says:  "It  is  evident  that  the  ordination  of  deaconesses  included  a  vow  of  celibacy." 
We  have  already  seen  the  language  used  by  St.  Paul  and  of  this  the  wording  of  the 
canon  of  Chalcedon  is  but  an  echo  (Canon  xv).  "  A  woman  shall  not  receive  the  laying  on  of 
hands  as  a  deaconess  under  forty  years  of  age,  and  then  only  after  searching  examination. 
And  if,  after  she  has  had  hands  laid  on  her,  and  has  continued  for  a  time  to  minister,  she 
shall  despise  the  Grace  of  God  and  give  herself  in  marriage,  she  shall  be  anathematized  and 
the  man  who  is  united  to  her."  The  civil  law  went  still  further,  and  by  Justinian's  Sixth 
Novel  (6)  those  who  attempted  to  marry  are  subjected  to  forfeiture  of  property  and  capital 
punishment.  In  the  collect  in  the  ancient  office  there  is  a  special  petition  that  the  newly 
admitted  deaconess  may  have  the  gift  of  continence. 

The  principal  work  of  the  deaconess  was  to  assist  the  female  candidates  for  holy  baptism. 
At  that  time  the  sacrament  of  baptism  was  always  administered  by  immersion  (except  to 
those  in  extreme  illness)  and  hence  there  was  much  that  such  an  order  of  women  could  be 
useful  in.  Moreover  they  sometimes  gave  to  the  female  catechumens  preliminary  instruc- 
tion, but  their  work  was  wholly  limited  to  women,  and  for  a  deaconess  of  the  Early  Church 
to  teach  a  man  or  to  nurse  him  in  sickness  would  have  been  an  impossibility.  The  duties 
of  the  deaconess  are  set  forth  in  many  ancient  writings,  I  cite  here  what  is  commonly  known 
as  the  XII  Canon  of  the  Fourth  Council  of  Carthage,  which  met  in  the  year  398  : 

"  Widows  and  dedicated  women  (sanctimoniales)  who  are  chosen  to  assist  at  the  baptism 
of  women,  should  be  so  well  instructed  in  their  office  as  to  be  able  to  teach  aptly  and  prop- 
erly unskilled  and  rustic  women  how  to  answer  at  the  time  of  their  baptism  to  the  questions 
put  to  them,  and  also  how  to  live  godly  after  they  have  been  baptized."  This  whole  matter 
is  treated  clearly  by  St.  Epiphanius  who,  while  indeed  speaking  of  deaconesses  as  an  order 
(rayixa),  asserts  that  "they  were  only  women-elders,  not  priestesses  in  any  sense,  that  their 


1  In  1836,  the  Lutheran  Pastor  Fliedner,  of  a  little  town  on  the 
Rhine,  opened  a  parish  hospital  the  nurses  of  which  he  called 
"  Deaconesses."  This  "  Deaconess  House  "  at  Kaiserswerth,  was 
the  mother-house  from  which  all  the  deaconess  establishments  of 
the  present  day  have  taken  their  origin.  The  Methodists  have 
adopted  the  system  successfully.  Some  efforts  have  been  made 
to  domesticate  it,  in  a  somewhat  modified  form,  also  in  the  Angli- 
can Churches  but  thus  far  with  but  little  success.  Of  course  these 
"  Deaconesses  "  resemble  the  Deaconesses  of  the  Early  Church 


only  in  name.  The  reader  who  may  be  interested  in  seeing  an 
effort  to  connect  the  modern  deaconess  with  the  deaconess  of  an- 
tiquity is  referred  to  The  Ministry  of  Deaconesses  by  Deaconess 
Cecilia  Robinson.  This  book,  it  should  be  said,  contains  much 
valuable  and  accurate  information  upon  the  subject,  but  accepts 
as  proven  facts  the  suppositions  of  the  late  Bishop  Lightfoot 
upon  the  subject ;  who  somewhat  rashly  asserted  that  "the  female 
diaconate  is  as  definite  an  institution  as  the  male  diaconate. 
Phcebe  is  as  much  a  deacon  as  Stephen  or  Philip  is  a  deacon ! " 


42 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


mission  Avas  not  to  interfere  in  any  way  with  Sacerdotal  functions,  but  simply  to  perform 
certain  offices  in  the  care  of  women"  (Hcer.  lxxix,  cap.  iij).  From  all  this  it  is  evident  that 
they  are  entirely  in  error  who  suppose  that  "  the  laying  on  of  hands  "  which  the  deaconesses 
received  corresponded  to  that  by  which  persons  were  ordained  to  the  diaconate,  presbyterate, 
and  episcopate  at  that  period  of  the  church's  history.  It  was  merely  a  solemn  dedication 
and  blessing  and  was  not  looked  upon  as  "  an  outward  sign  of  an  inward  grace  given."  For 
further  proof  of  this  I  must  refer  to  Morinus,  who  has  treated  the  matter  most  admirably. 
(De  Ordinationibus,  Exereitatio  X.) 

The  deaconesses  existed  but  a  short  while.  The  council  of  Laodicea  as  early  as  a.d. 
343-381,  forbade  the  appointment  of  any  who  were  called  Trparjixm^  ( Vide  Canon  xi)  ;  and 
the  first  council  of  Orange,  a.d.  441,  in  its  twenty-sixth  canon  forbids  the  appointment  of 
deaconesses  altogether,  and  the  Second  council  of  the  same  city  in  canons  xvij  and  xviij,  de- 
crees that  deaconesses  who  married  were  to  be  excommunicated  unless  they  renounced  the 
men  they  were  living  with,  and  that,  on  account  of  the  weakness  of  the  sex,  none  for  the 
future  were  to  be  ordained. 

Thomassinus,  to  whom  I  refer  the  reader  for  a  very  full  treatment  of  the  whole  subject, 
is  of  opinion  that  the  order  was  extinct  in  the  West  by  the  tenth  or  twelfth  century,  but 
that  it  lingered  on  a  little  later  at  Constantinople  but  only  in  conventual  institutions.  (Thom- 
assin,  Ancienne  et  Nouvelle  Discipline  de  I'Eglise,  I  Partie,  Livre  III.) 


CANON  XX. 

Forasmuch  as  there  are  certain  persons  who  kneel  on  the  Lord's  Day  and  in  the  days 
of  Pentecost,  therefore,  to  the  intent  that  all  things  may  be  uniformly  observed  every- 
where (in  every  parish),  it  seems  good  to  the  holy  Synod  that  prayer  be  made  to  God 
standing. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XX. 

On  Lord's  days  and  at  Pentecost  all  must 
pray  standing  and  not  kneeling. 

Hammond. 

■  Although  kneeling  was  the  common  posture 
for  prayer  in  the  primitive  Church,  yet  the 
custom  had  prevailed,  even  from  the  earliest 
times,  of  standing  at  prayer  on  the  Lord's 
day,  and  during  the  fifty  days  between  Easter 
and  Pentecost.  Tertullian,  in  a  passage  in  his 
treatise  De  Corona  Militis,  which  is  often 
qtioted,  mentions  it  amongst  other  observ- 
ances which,  though  not  expressly  command- 
ed in  Scripture,  yet  were  universally  prac- 
tised upon  the  authority  of  tradition.  ':  We 
consider  it  unlawful,"  he  says,  "  to  fast,  or  to 
pray  kneeling,  upon  the  Lord's  day ;  we  en- 
joy the  same  liberty  from  Easter-day  to  that 
of  Pentecost."  De  Cor.  Mil.  s.  3,  4.  Many 
other  of  the  Fathers  notice  the  same  practice, 
the  reason  of  which,  as  given  by  Augustine 
and  others,  was  to  commemorate  the  resur- 


rection of  our  Lord,  and  to  signify  the  rest 
and  joy  of  our  own  resurrection,  which  that  of 
our  Lord  assured.  This  canon,  as  Beveridge 
observes,  is  a  proof  of  the  importance  former- 
ly attached  to  an  uniformity  of  sacred  rites 
throughout  the  Church,  which  made  the  Ni- 
cene  Fathers  thus  sanction  and  enforce  by 
their  authority  a  practice  which  in  itself  is  in- 
different, and  not  commanded  directly  or  in- 
directly in  Scripture,  and  assign  this  as  their 
reason  for  doing  so :  "In  order  that  all  things 
may  be  observed  in  like  manner  in  every  par- 
ish "  or  diocese. 

Hefele. 

All  the  churches  did  not,  however,  adopt 
this  practice  ;  for  we  see  in  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles  (xx.  36  and  xxi.  5)  that  St,  Paul 
prayed  kneeling  during  the  time  between  Pen- 
tecost and  Easter. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici.  Decretum,  Pars  III,  De  Cone. 
Dist.  III.  c.  x. 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325  43 


EXCURSUS  ON  THE  NUMBER  OF  THE  NICENE  CANONS. 

There  has  come  down  to  us  a  Latin  letter  purporting  to  have  been  written  by  St.  Atha- 
nasius  to  Pope  Marcus.  This  letter  is  found  in  the  Benedictine  edition  of  St.  Athanasius's 
works  (ed.  Patav.  ii.  599)  but  rejected  as  spurious  by  Montfaucon  the  learned  editor.  In  this 
letter  is  contained  the  marvellous  assertion  that  the  Council  of  Nice  at  first  adopted  forty 
canons,  which  were  in  Greek,  that  it  subsequently  added  twenty  Latin  canons,  and  that  after- 
wards the  council  reassembled  and  set  forth  seventy  altogether.  A  tradition  that  some- 
thing of  the  kind  had  taken  place  was  prevalent  in  parts  of  the  East,  and  some  collections 
did  contain  seventy  canons. 

In  the  Vatican  Library  is  a  MS.  which  was  bought  for  it  by  the  famous  Asseman,  from 
the  Coptic  Patriarch,  John,  and  which  contains  not  only  seventy,  but  eighty  canons  attrib- 
uted to  the  council  of  Nice.  The  MS.  is  in  Arabic,  and  was  discovered  by  J.  B.  Romanus, 
S.  J.,  who  first  made  its  contents  known,  and  translated  into  Latin  a  copy  he  had  made  of  it. 
Another  Jesuit,  Pisanus,  was  writing  a  history  of  the  Nicene  Council  at  the  time  and  he 
received  the  eighty  newly  found  canons  into  his  book  ;  but,  out  of  respect  to  the  pseudo- 
Athanasian  letter,  he  at  first  cut  down  the  number  to  seventy ;  but  in  later  editions  he  fol- 
lowed the  MS.  All  this  was  in  the  latter  half  of  the  sixteenth  century  ;  and  in  1578  Turri- 
anus,  who  had  had  Father  Romanus's  translation  revised  before  it  was  first  published,  now 
issued  an  entirely  new  translation  with  a  Proemium1  containing  a  vast  amount  of  informa- 
tion upon  the  whole  subject,  and  setting  up  an  attempted  proof  that  the  number  of  the 
Nicene  Canons  exceeded  twenty.     His  argument  for  the  time  being  carried  the  day. 

Hefele  says,  "  it  is  certain  that  the  Orientals 2  believed  the  Council  of  Nice  to  have  promul- 
gated more  than  twenty  canons  :  the  learned  Anglican,  Beveridge,3  has  proved  this,  repro- 
ducing an  ancient  Arabic  paraphrase  of  the  canons  of  the  first  four  Ecumenical  Councils. 
According  to  this  Arabic  paraphrase,  found  in  a  MS.  in  the  Bodleian  Library,  the  Council  of 
Nice  must  have  put  forth  three  books  of  canons.  .  .  .  The  Arabic  paraphrase  of  which 
we  are  speaking  gives  a  paraphrase  of  all  these  canons,  but  Beveridge  took  only  the  part 
referring  to  the  second  book — that  is  to  say,  the  paraphrase  of  the  twenty  genuine  canons  ; 
for,  according  to  his  view,  which  was  perfectly  correct,  it  was  only  these  twenty  canons 
which  were  really  the  work  of  the  Council  of  Nice,  and  all  the  others  were  falsely  attributed 
to  it."4 

Hefele  goes  on  to  prove  that  the  canons  he  rejects  must  be  of  much  later  origin,  some 
being  laws  of  the  times  of  Theodosius  and  Justinian  according  to  the  opinion  of  Renaudot.5 

Before  leaving  this  point  I  should  notice  the  profound  research  on  these  Arabic  canons 
of  the  Maronite,  Abraham  Echellensis.  He  gives  eighty-four  canons  in  his  Latin  translation 
of  1645,  and  was  of  opinion  that  they  had  been  collected  from  different  Oriental  sources,  and 
sects  ;  but  that  originally  they  had  all  been  translated  from  the  Greek,  and  were  collected 
by  James,  the  celebrated  bishop  of  Nisibis,  who  was  present  at  Nice.  But  this  last  supposi- 
tion is  utterly  untenable. 

Among  the  learned  there  have  not  been  wanting  some  who  have  held  that  the  Council  of 
Nice  passed  more  canons  than  the  twenty  we  possess,  and  have  arrived  at  the  conclusion 
independently  of  the  Arabic  discovery,  such  are  Baronius  and  Card.  dAguirre,  but  their 
arguments  have  been  sufficiently  answered,  and  they  cannot  present  anything  able  to  weaken 
the  conclusion  that  flows  from  the  consideration  of  the  following  facts. 


Vide  Labbe.  Cone.  ii.  287.  '  by  mistake,'  whicb  were  not  Nicene,  as  popes  Zosimus,  Innocent 


2  Who  exactly  these  "Orientals"  were  Hefele  does  not  speci- 
fy, but  Ffonlkes  well  points  out  (Diet.  Christ.  Antiq.  sub  voce 
Councils  of  Nicaea)  that  it  is  an  entire  mistake  to  suppose  that  the 
Greek  Church  "  over  quoted  other  canons  [than  the  xx]  as  Nicene 


and  Leo  did."  3  Beveridge    Synod,  sive  I'and.  i.  < 

4  Hefele  :  Hist.  Councils,  I.  362. 

5  Renaudot :  Hist.   Patriarchamm  Alexandrianorum  Jacob- 
itarum.    Paris,  1713,  p.  75. 


44  I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


(Hefele  :  History  of  the  Councils,  Vol.  I.  pp.  355  el  seqq.     [2d  ed.]) 

Let  us  see  first  what  is  the  testimony  of  those  Greek  and  Latin  authors  who  lived  about 
the  time  of  the  Council,  concerning  the  number. 

a.  The  first  to  be  consulted  among  the  Greek  authors  is  the  learned  Theodoret,  who 
lived  about  a  century  after  the  Council  of  Nicsea.  He  says,  in  his  History  of  the  Church  : 
"After  the  condemnation  of  the  Arians,  the  bishops  assembled  once  more,  and  decreed  twenty 
canons  on  ecclesiastical  discipline." 

b.  Twenty  years  later,  Gelasius,  Bishop  of  Cyzicus,  after  much  research  into  the  most 
ancient  documents,  wrote  a  history  of  the  Nicene  Council.  Gelasius  also  says  expressly  that 
the  Council  decreed  twenty  canons  ;  and,  what  is  more  important,  he  gives  the  original  text  of 
these  canons  exactly  in  the  same  order,  and  according  to  the  tenor  which  we  find  elsewhere. 

c.  Rufinus  is  more  ancient  than  these  two  historians.  He  was  born  near  the  period 
when  the  Council  of  Nicsea  was  held,  and  about  half  a  century  after  he  wrote  his  celebrated 
history  of  the  Church,  in  which  he  inserted  a  Latin  translation  of  the  Nicene  canons.  Kufi- 
nus also  knew  only  of  these  twenty  canons  ;  but  as  he  has  divided  the  sixth  and  the  eighth 
into  two  parts,  he  has  given  twenty-two  canons,  which  are  exactly  the  same  as  the  twenty  fur- 
nished by  the  other  historians. 

d.  The  famous  discussion  between  the  African  bishops  and  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  on  the 
subject  of  appeals  to  Rome,  gives  us  a  very  important  testimony  on  the  true  number  of 
the  Nicene  canons.  The  presbyter  Apiarius  of  Sicca  in  Africa,  having  been  deposed  for 
many  crimes,  appealed  to  Rome.  Pope  Zosimus  (417-418)  took  the  appeal  into  considera- 
tion, sent  legates  to  Africa ;  and  to  prove  that  he  had  the  right  to  act  thus,  he  quoted  a 
canon  of  the  Council  of  Nicsea,  containing  these  words:  "  When  a  bishop  thinks  he  has  been 
unjustly  deposed  by  his  colleagues  he  may  appeal  to  Rome,  and  the  Roman  bishop  shall  have 
the  business  decided  by  jadiccs  in partibus."  The  canon  quoted  by  the  Pope  does  not  belong 
to  the  Council  of  Nicsea,  as  he  affirmed  ;  it  was  the  fifth  canon  of  the  Council  of  Sardica  (the 
seventh  in  the  Latin  version).  What  explains  the  error  of  Zosimus  is  that  in  the  ancient 
copies  the  canons  of  Nicsea  and  Sardica  are  written  consecutively,  with  the  same  figures,  and 
under  the  common  title  of  canons  of  the  Council  of  Nicsea  ;  and  Zosimus  might  optima  fide 
fall  into  an  error — which  he  shared  with  Greek  authors,  his  contemporaries,  who  also  mixed 
the  canons  of  Nicsea  with  those  of  Sardica.  The  African  bishops,  not  finding  the  canon  quoted 
by  the  Pope  either  in  their  Greek  or  in  their  Latin  copies,  in  vain  consulted  also  the  copy 
which  Bishop  Cecilian,  who  had  himself  been  present  at  the  Council  of  Nicsea,  had  brought  to 
Carthage.  The  legates  of  the  Pope  then  declared  that  they  did  not  rely  upon  these  copies, 
and  they  agreed  to  send  to  Alexandria  and  to  Constantinople  to  ask  the  patriarchs  of  these  two 
cities  for  authentic  copies  of  the  canons  of  the  Council  of  Nicsea.  The  African  bishops  desired 
in  their  turn  that  Pope  Boniface  should  take  the  same  step  (Pope  Zosimus  had  died  meanwhile 
in  418) — that  he  should  ask  for  copies  from  the  Archbishops  of  Constantinople,  Alexandria,  and 
Antioch.  Cyril  of  Alexandria  and  Atticus  of  Constantinople,  indeed,  sent  exact  and  faithful 
copies  of  the  Creed  and  canons  of  Nicsea ;  and  two  learned  men  of  Constantinople,  Theilo 
and  Thearistus,  even  translated  these  canons  into  Latin.  Their  translation  has  been  pre- 
served to  us  in  the  acts  of  the  sixth  Council  of  Carthage,  and  it  contains  only  the  twenty 
ordinary  canons.  It  might  be  thought  at  first  sight  that  it  contained  twenty-one  canons  ; 
but  on  closer  consideration  we  see,  as  Hardouin  has  proved,  that  this  twenty-first  article  is 
nothing  but  an  historical  notice  appended  to  the  Nicene  canons  by  the  Fathers  of  Carthage. 
It  is  conceived  in  these  terms :  "  After  the  bishops  had  decreed  these  rules  at  Nicsea,  and 
after  the  holy  Council  had  decided  what  was  the  ancient  rule  for  the  celebration  of  Easter, 
peace  and  unity  of  faith  were  re-established  between  the  East  and  the  West.  This  is  what 
we  (the  African  bishops)  have  thought  it  right  to  add  according  to  the  history  of  the  Church." 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325  45 


The  bishops  of  Africa  despatched  to  Pope  Boniface  the  copies  which  had  been  sent  to 
them  from  Alexandria  and  Constantinople,  in  the  month  of  November  419  ;  and  subsequently 
in  their  letters  to  Celestine  I.  (423-432),  successor  to  Boniface,  they  appealed  to  the  text  of 
these  documents. 

e.  All  the  ancient  collections  of  canons,  either  in  Latin  or  Greek,  composed  in  the  fourth, 
or  quite  certainly  at  least  in  the  fifth  century,  agree  in  giving  only  these  twenty  canons  to 
Nicsea.  The  most  ancient  of  these  collections  were  made  in  the  Greek  Church,  and  in  the 
course  of  time  a  very  great  number  of  copies  of  them  were  written.  Many  of  these  copies 
have  descended  to  us ;  many  libraries  possess  copies  ;  thus  Montfaucon  enumerates  several 
in  his  BibliotJieca  Coisliniana.  Fabricius  makes  a  similar  catalogue  of  the  copies  in  his  Biblio- 
theca  Grceca  to  those  found  in  the  libraries  of  Turin,  Florence,  Venice,  Oxford,  Moscow,  etc.; 
and  he  adds  that  these  copies  also  contain  the  so-called  apostolic  canons,  and  those  of  the 
most  ancient  councils.  The  French  bishop  John  Tilius  presented  to  Paris,  in  1540,  a  MS. 
of  one  of  these  Greek  collections  as  it  existed  in  the  ninth  century.  It  contains  exactly  our 
twenty  canons  of  Nicsea,  besides  the  so-called  apostolic  canons,  those  of  Ancyra,  etc.  Elias 
Ehmger  published  a  new  edition  at  Wittemberg  in  1614,  using  a  second  MS.  which  was 
found  at  Augsburg ;  but  the  Roman  collection  of  the  Councils  had  before  given  in  1608, 
the  Greek  text  of  the  twenty  canons  of  Nicsea.  This  text  of  the  Boman  editors,  with 
the  exception  of  some  insignificant  variations,  was  exactly  the  same  as  that  of  the  edition 
of  Tilius.  Neither  the  learned  Jesuit  Sirmond  nor  his  coadjutors  have  mentioned  what 
manuscripts  were  consulted  in  preparing  this  edition  ;  probably  they  were  manuscripts  drawn 
from  several  libraries,  and  particularly  from  that  of  the  Vatican.  The  text  of  this  Roman 
edition  passed  into  all  the  following  collections,  even  into  those  of  Hardouin  and  Mansi  ; 
while  Justell  in  his  Bibliotheca  juris  Canonici  and  Beveridge  in  his  Synodicon  (both  of  the 
eighteenth  century),  give  a  somewhat  different  text,  also  collated  from  MSS.,  and  very  simi- 
lar to  the  text  given  by  Tilius.  Bruns,  in  his  recent  Bibliotheca  Ecclesiastica,  compares  the 
two  texts.  Now  all  these  Greek  MSS.  consulted  at  such  different  times,  and  by  all  these 
editors,  acknowledge  only  twenty  canons  of  Nicsea,  and  always  the  same  twenty  which  we 
possess. 

The  Latin  collections  of  the  canons  of  the  Councils  also  give  the  same  result — for  exam- 
ple, the  most  ancient  and  the  most  remarkable  of  all,  the  Brisca,  and  that  of  Dionysius  the 
Less,  which  was  collected  about  the  year  500.  The  testimony  of  this  latter  collection  is  the 
more  important  for  the  number  twenty,  as  Dionysius  refers  to  the  Grceca  auctoritas. 

f.  Among  the  later  Eastern  witnesses  we  may  further  mention  Photius,  Zonaras  and 
Balsamon.  Photius,  in  his  Collection  of  the  Canons,  and  in  his  Nomocanon,  as  well  as  the 
two  other  writers  in  their  commentaries  upon  the  canons  of  the  ancient  Councils,  quote 
only  and  know  only  twenty  canons  of  Nicaea,  and  always  those  which  we  possess. 

g.  The  Latin  canonists  of  the  Middle  Ages  also  acknowledge  only  these  twenty  canons  of 
Nicsea.  We  have  proof  of  this  in  the  celebrated  Spanish  collection,  which  is  generally  but 
erroneously  attributed  to  St.  Isidore  (it  was  composed  at  the  commencement  of  the  seventh 
century),  and  in  that  of  Adrian  (so  called  because  it  was  offered  to  Charles  the  Great  by 
Pope  Adrian  I).  The  celebrated  Hincmar,  Archbishop  of  Rheims,  the  first  canonist  of  the 
ninth  century,  in  his  turn  attributes  only  twenty  canons  to  the  Council  of  Nicsea,  and  even 
the  pseudo-Isidore  assigns  it  no  more. 

I  add  for  the  convenience  of  the  reader  the  captions  of  the  Eighty  Canons  as  given  by 
Turrianus,  translating  them  from  the  reprint  in  Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  II.  col.  291. 
The  Eighty-four  Canons  as  given  by  Echellensis  together  with  numerous  Constitutions  and 
Decrees  attributed  to  the  Nicene  Council  are  likewise  to  be  found  in  Labbe  (ut  supra,  col.  318). 


46 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


THE  CAPTIONS  OF  THE   ARABIC    CANONS   ATTRIBUTED    TO  THE   COUNCIL 

OF  NICE. 


Canon  I.1 
Insane  persons  and  energumens  should  not 
be  ordained. 

Canon  II. 
Bond  servants  are  not  to  be  ordained. 

Canon  III. 

Neophytes  in  the  faith  are  not  to  be  or- 
dained to  Holy  Orders  before  they  have  a 
knowledge  of  Holy  Scripture.  And  such,  if 
convicted  after  their  ordination  of  grave  sin, 
are  to  be  deposed  with  those  who  ordained 
them. 

Canon  IV. 

The  cohabitation  of  women  with  bishops, 
presbyters,  and  deacons  prohibited  on  ac- 
count of  their  celibacy. 

We  decree  that  bishops  shall  not  live  with 
women  ;  nor  shall  a  presbyter  who  is  a  wid- 
ower ;  neither  shall  they  escort  them ;  nor  be 
familiar  with  them,  nor  gaze  upon  them  per- 
sistently. And  the  same  decree  is  made  with 
regard  to  every  celibate  priest,  and  the  same 
concerning  such  deacons  as  have  no  wives. 
And  this  is  to  be  the  case  whether  the  woman 
be  beautiful  or  ugly,  Avhether  a  young  girl  or 
beyond  the  age  of  puberty,  whether  great  in 
birth,  or  an  orphan  taken  out  of  charity  under 
pretext  of  bringing  her  up.  For  the  devil 
with  such  arms  slays  religious,  bishops,  pres- 
byters, and  deacons,  and  incites  them  to  the 
fires  of  desire.  But  if  she  be  an  old  woman, 
and  of  advanced  age,  or  a  sister,  or  mother, 
or  aunt,  or  grandmother,  it  is  permitted  to 
live  with  these  because  such  persons  are  free 
from  all  suspicion  of  scandal.2 

Canon  V. 
Of  the  election  of  a  bishop  and  of  the  con- 
firmation of  the  election. 

Canon  VI. 
That  those  excommunicated  by  one  bishop 
are  not  to  be  received  by  another  ;  and  that 
those  whose  excommunication  has  been  shown 
to  have  been  unjust  should  be  absolved  by 
the  archbishop  or  patriarch. 

Canon  VII. 
That  provincial  Councils  should   be   held 
twice  a  year,  for  the  consideration  of  all  things 

i  Turrianus  calls  them  "Chapters." 

2 1  have  translated  this  canon  in  full  because  the  caption  did 
not  seem  to  give  fairly  its  meaning.  In  Labbe  will  be  found  a 
long  and  most  curious  note. 


affecting  the  churches  of  the  bishops  of  the 
province. 

Canon  VIII. 

Of  the  patriarchs  of  Alexandria  and  An- 
tioch,  and  of  their  jurisdiction. 

Canon  IX. 

Of  one  who  solicits  the  episcopate  when 
the  people  do  not  wish  him  ;  or  if  they  do 
desire  him,  but  without  the  consent  of  the 
archbishop. 

Canon  X. 

How  the  bishop  of  Jerusalem  is  to  be  hon- 
oured, the  honour,  however,  of  the  metropol- 
itan church  of  Csesarea  being  preserved  in- 
tact, to  which  he  is  subject. 

Canon  XI. 

Of  those  who  force  themselves  into  the  or- 
der of  presbyters  without  election  or  exam- 
ination. 

Canon  XII. 

Of  the  bishop  who  ordains  one  whom  he 
understands  has  denied  the  faith  ;  also  of  one 
ordained  who  after  that  he  had  denied  it, 
crept  into  orders. 

Canon  XIII. 

Of  one  who  of  his  own  will  goes  to  another 
church,  having  been  chosen  by  it,  and  does 
not  wish  afterwards  to  stay  there. 

Of  taking  pains  that  he  be  transferred  from 
his  own  church  to  another. 

Canon  XIV. 

No  one  shall  become  a  monk  without  the 
bishop's  license,  and  why  a  license  is  required. 

Canon  XV. 

That  clerics  or  religious  who  lend  on  usury 
should  be  cast  from  their  grade. 

Canon  XVI. 

Of  the  honour  to  be  paid  to  the  bishop  and 
to  a  presbyter  by  the  deacons. 

Canon  XVII. 

Of  the  system  and  of  the  manner  of  receiv- 
ing those  who  are  converted  from  the  heresy 
of  Paul  of  Samosata. 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


47 


Canon  XVIII. 
Of  the  system  and  manner  of  receiving 
those  who  are  converted  from  the  heresy  of 
the  Novatians. 

Canon  XIX. 
Of  the  system  and  manner  of  receiving 
those  who  return  after  a  lapse  from  the  faith, 
and  of  receiving  the  relapsed,  and  of  those 
brought  into  peril  of  death  by  sickness  before 
their  penance  is  finished,  and  concerning  such 
as  are  convalescent. 

Canon  XX. 
Of  avoiding  the  conversation  of  evil  work- 
ers and  wizards,  also  of  the  penance  of  them 
that  have  not  avoided  such. 

Canon  XXI. 

Of  incestuous  marriages  contrary  to  the 
law  of  spiritual  relationship,  and  of  the  pen- 
ance of  such  as  are  in  such  marriages. 

[The  time  of  penance  fixed  is  twenty  years, 
only  godfather  and  godmother  are  mentioned, 
and  nothing  is  said  of  separation.] 

Canon  XXII. 

Of  sponsors  in  baptism. 

Men  shall  not  hold  females  at  the  font, 
neither  women  males;  but  women  females, 
and  men  males. 

Canon  XXIII. 

Of  the  prohibited  marriages  of  spiritual 
brothers  and  sisters  from  receiving  them  in 
baptism. 

Canon  XXIV. 

Of  him  who  has  married  two  wives  at  the 
same  time,  or  who  through  lust  has  added 
another  woman  to  his  wife  ;  and  of  his  pun- 
ishment. 

Part  of  the  canon.  If  he  be  a  priest  he  is 
forbidden  to  sacrifice  and  is  cut  off  from  the 
communion  of  the  faithful  until  he  turn  out 
of  the  house  the  second  woman,  and  he  ought 
to  retain  the  first. 

Canon  XXV. 
That  no  one   should  be  forbidden   Holy 
Communion  unless  such  as  are  doing  penance. 

Canon  XXVI. 
Clerics  are  forbidden  from   suretyship   or 
witness-giving  in  criminal  causes. 

Canon  XXVII. 
Of  avoiding  the  excommunicate,  and  of  not 
receiving  the  oblation  from  them  ;  and  of  the 


excommunication  of  him  who  does  not  avoid 
the  excommunicated. 

Canon  XXVIII. 
How  anger,  indignation,  and  hatred  should 
be  avoided  by  the  priest,  especially  because 
he  has  the  power  of  excommunicating  others. 

Canon  XXIX. 
Of  not  kneeling  in  prayer. 

Canon  XXX. 
Of  giving  [only]  names  of  Christians  in 
baptism,  and  of  heretics  who  retain  the  faith 
in  the  Trinity  and  the  perfect  form  of  bap- 
tism ;  and  of  others  not  retaining  it,  worthy 
of  a  worse  name,  and  of  how  such  are  to  be 
received  when  they  come  to  the  faith 

Canon  XXXI. 
Of  the  system  and  manner  of  receiving  con- 
verts to  the  Orthodox  faith  from  the  heresy 
of  Arius  and  of  other  like. 

Canon  XXXII. 
Of  the  system  of  receiving  those  who  have 
kept  the  dogmas  of  the  faith  and  the  Church's 
laws,  and  yet  have   separated  from  us  and 
afterwards  come  back. 

Canon  XXXIII. 

Of  the  place  of  residence  of  the  Patriarch, 
and  of  the  honour  which  should  be  given  to 
the  bishop  of  Jerusalem  and  to  the  bishop  of 
Seleucia. 

Canon  XXXIV. 

Of  the  honour  to  be  given  to  the  Archbishop 
of  Seleucia  in  the  Synod  of  Greece. 

Canon  XXXV. 

Of  not  holding  a  provincial  synod  in  the 
province  of  Persia  without  the  authority  of 
the  patriarch  of  Antioch,  and  how  the  bishops 
of  Persia  are  subject  to  the  metropolitans  of 
Antioch. 

Canon  XXXVI. 

Of  the  creation  of  a  patriarch  for  Ethiopia, 
and  of  his  power,  and  of  the  honour  to  be  paid 
him  in  the  Synod  of  Greece. 

Canon  XXXVII. 
Of  the  election  of  the  Archbishop  of  Cyprus, 
who  is  subject  to  the  patriarch  of  Antioch. 

Canon  XXXVIII. 
That   the   ordination   of   ministers  of  the 
Church  by  bishops  in  the  dioceses  of  stran- 
gers is  forbidden. 


48 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


Canon  XXXIX. 

Of  the  care  and  power  which  a  Patriarch 
has  over  the  bishops  and  archbishops  of  his 
patriarchate  ;  and  of  the  primacy  of  the  Bishop 
of  Borne  over  all. 

Let  the  patriarch  consider  what  things  are 
done  by  the  archbishops  and  bishops  in  their 
provinces  ;  and  if  he  shall  find  anything  done 
by  them  otherwise  than  it  should  be,  let  him 
change  it,  and  order  it,  as  seemeth  him  fit ; 
for  he  is  the  father  of  all,  and  they  are  his 
sons.  And  although  the  archbishop  be  among 
the  bishops  as  an  elder  brother,  who  hath  the 
care  of  his  brethren,  and  to  whom  they  owe 
obedience  because  he  is  over  them ;  yet  the 
patriarch  is  to  all  those  who  are  under  his 
power,  just  as  he  who  holds  the  seat  of  Borne, 
is  the  head  and  prince  of  all  patriarchs ;  in- 
asmuch as  he  is  first,  as  was  Peter,  to  whom 
power  is  given  over  all  Christian  princes,  and 
over  all  their  peoples,  as  he  who  is  the  Vicar 
of  Christ  our  Lord  over  all  peoples  and  over 
the  whole  Christian  Church,  and  whoever  shall 
contradict  this,  is  excommunicated  by  the 
Synod.1 

[I  add  Canon  XXXVII.  of  Echellensis's 
Nova  Vcrsio  LXXXIV.  Arabic.  Canonum  Cone. 
Nicceni,  that  the  reader  may  compare  it  with 
the  foregoing.] 

Let  there  be  only  four  patriarchs  in  the 
whole  world  as  there  are  four  writers  of  the 
Gospel,  and  four  rivers,  etc.  And  let  there 
be  a  prince  and  chief  over  them,  the  lord  of 
the  see  of  the  Divine  Peter  at  Borne,  accord- 
ing as  the  Apostles  commanded.  And  after 
him  the  lord  of  the  great  Alexandria,  which 
is  the  see  of  Mark.  And  the  third  is  the  lord 
of  Ephesus,  which  is  the  see  of  John  the 
Divine  who  speaks  divine  things.  And  the 
fourth  and  last  is  my  lord  of  Antioch,  which 
is  another  see  of  Peter.  And  let  all  the  bish- 
ops be  divided  under  the  hands  of  these  four 
patriarchs  ;  and  the  bishops  of  the  little  towns 
which  are  under  the  dominion  of  the  great 
cities  let  them  be  under  the  authority  of  these 
metropolitans.  But  let  every  metropolitan 
of  these  great  cities  appoint  the  bishops  of 
his  province,  but  let  none  of  the  bishops  ap- 
point him,  for  he  is  greater  than  they.  There- 
fore let  every  man  know  his  own  rank,  and 
let  him  not  usurp  the  rank  of  another.  And 
Avhosoever  shall  contradict  this  law  which  we 
have  established  the  Fathers  of  the  Synod 
subject  him  to  anathema. 3 


1 1  have  translated  the  whole  canon  literally ;  the  reader  will 
judge  of  its  antiquity. 

-  Canon  XXXIX.  of  this  series  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  Pa- 
triarchs or  with  the  see  of  Rome  and  its  prerogatives. 


Canon  XL. 
Of  the  provincial  synod  which  should  be 
held  twice  every  year,  and  of  its  utility ;  to- 
gether with  the  excommunication  of  such  as 
oppose  the  decree. 

Canon  XLI. 
Of  the  synod  of  Archbishops,  which  meets 
once  a  year  with  the  Patriarch,  and  of  its 
utility ;  also  of  the  collection  to  be  made  for 
the  support  of  the  patriarch  throughout  the 
provinces  and  places  subject  to  the  patriarch. 

Canon  XLII. 
Of  a  cleric  or  monk  who  when  fallen  into 
sin,  and  summoned  once,  twice,  and  thrice, 
does  not  present  himself  for  trial. 

Canon  XLIII. 
What  the  patriarch  should  do  in  the  case 
of  a  defendant  set  at  liberty  unpunished  by 
the  decision  of  the  bishop,  presbyter,  or  even 
of  a  deacon,  as  the  case  may  be. 

Canon  XLIV. 
How  an  archbishop  ought  to  give  trial  to 
one  of  his  suffragan  bishops. 

Canon  XLV. 
Of  the  receiving  of  complaints  and  con- 
demnation of  an  archbishop  against  his  pa- 
triarch. 

Canon  XLVI. 
How  a  patriarch  should  admit  a  complaint 
or  judgment  of  an  Archbishop   against  an 
Archbishop. 

Canon  XLVII. 

Of  those  excommunicated  by  a  certain  one, 
when  they  can  be  and  when  they  cannot  be 
absolved  by  another. 

Canon  XLVIH. 
No  bishop  shall  choose  his  own  successor. 

Canon  XLIX. 
No  simoniacal  ordinations  shall  be  made. 

Canon  L. 
There  shall  be  but  one  bishop  of  one  city, 
and  one  parochus  of  one  town ;  also  the  in- 
cumbent, whether  bishop  or  parish  priest, 
shall  not  be  removed  in  favour  of  a  successor 
desired  by  some  of  the  people  unless  he  has 
been  convicted  of  manifest  crime. 

Canon  LI. 
Bishops  shall  not  allow  the  separation  of  a 
wife  from  her  husband  on  account  of  discord 
— [in  American,    "incompatibility    of    tem- 
per"]. 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


49 


Canon  LII.  Canon  LXIV. 

Usury  and  the  base  seeking  of  worldly  gain  ■  Of  the  offices  said  in  the  church,  the  night 
is  forbidden  to  the  clergy,  also  conversation  I  and  day  offices,  and  of  the  collect  for  all  those 
and  fellowship  with  Jews.  who  rule  that  church, 


Canon  LIII. 
Marriages  with  infidels  to  be  avoided. 

Canon  LIV. 
Of  the  election  of  a  chorepiscopus,  and  of 
his  duties  in  towns,  and  villages,  and  monas- 
teries. 

Canon  LV. 
How    a    chorepiscopus    should   visit    the 
churches  and  monasteries  which  are  under 
his  jurisdiction. 

Canon  LVI. 
Of  how  the  presbyters  of  the  towns  and  vil- 
lages should  go  twice  a  year  with  their  chor- 
episcopus to  salute  the  bishop,  and  how  re- 
ligious should  do  so  once  a  year  from  their 
monasteries,  and  how  the  new  abbot  of  a 
monastery  should  go  thrice. 

Canon  LVII. 
Of  the  rank  in  sitting  during  the  celebra- 
tion of  service  in  church  by  the  bishop,  the 
archdeacon  and  the  chorepiscopus ;  and  of 
the  office  of  archdeacon,  and  of  the  honour 
due  the  archpresbyter. 

Canon  LVIII. 
Of  the  honour  due  the  archdeacon  and  the 
chorepiscopus  when  they  sit  in  church  during 
the  absence  of  the  bishop,  and  when  they  go 
about  with  the  bishop. 

Canon  LIX. 
How  all  the  grades  of  the  clergy  and  their 
duties  should  be  publiclv  described  and  set 
forth. 

Canon  LX. 
Of  how  men  are  to  be  chosen  from  the  dio- 
cese for  holy  orders,  and  of  how  they  should 
be  examined. 

Canon  LXI. 
Of  the  honour  due  to  the  deacons,  and  how 
the  clerics  must  not  put  themselves  in  their 
way. 

Canon  LXII. 
The  number  of  presbyters  and  deacons  is 
to  be  adapted  to  the  work  of  the  church  and 
to  its  means. 

Canon  LXIII. 
Of  the  Ecclesiastical  Economist  and  of  the 
others  who  with  him  care  for  the  church's 
possessions. 

VOL.    XIV, 


Canon  LXV. 
Of  the  order  to  be  observed  at  the  funeral 
of  a  bishop,  of  a  chorepiscopus  and  of  an  arch' 
deacon,  and  of  the  office  of  exequies, 

Canon  LXVI. 

Of  taking  a  second  wife,  after  the  former 
one  has  been  disowned  for  any  cause,  or  even 
not  put  away,  and  of  him  who  falsely  accuses 
his  wife  of  adultery. 

If  any  priest  or  deacon  shall  put  away  his 
wife  on  account  of  her  fornication,  or  for  other 
cause,  as  aforesaid,  or  cast  her  out  of  doors 
for  external  good,  or  that  he  may  change  her 
for  another  more  beautiful,  or  better,  or  richer, 
or  does  so  out  of  his  lust  which  is  displeasing 
to  God  ;  and  after  she  has  been  put  away  for 
any  of  these  causes  he  shall  contract  matri- 
mony with  another,  or  without  having  put 
her  away  shall  take  another,  whether  free  or 
bond  ;  and  shall  have  both  equally,  they  living 
separately  and  he  sleeping  every  night  with 
one  or  other  of  them,  or  else  keeping  both  in 
the  same  house  and  bed,  let  him  be  deposed. 
If  he  were  a  layman  let  him  be  deprived  of 
communion.  But  if  anyone  falsely  defames 
his  wife  charging  her  with  adultery,  so  that 
he  turns  her  out  of  doors,  the  matter  must 
be  diligently  examined ;  and  if  the  accusation 
was  false,  he  shall  be  deposed  if  a  cleric,  but 
if  a  layman  shall  be  prohibited  from  entering 
the  church  and  from  the  communion  of  the 
faithful ;  and  shall  be  compelled  to  live  with 
her  whom  he  has  defamed,  even  though  she 
be  deformed,  and  poor,  and  insane  ;  and  who- 
ever shall  not  obey  is  excommunicated  by 
the  Synod. 

[Note. — The  reader  will  notice  that  by  this 
canon  a  husband  is  deposed  or  excommuni- 
cated, as  the  case  may  be,  if  he  marry  another 
woman,  after  putting  away  his  wife  on  ac- 
count of  her  adultery.  It  is  curious  that  in 
the  parallel  canon  in  the  collection  of  Echel- 
lensis,  which  is  numbered  LXXL,  the  reading 
is  quite  different,  although  it  is  very  awkward 
and  inconsequent  as  given.  Moreover,  it 
should  be  remembered  that  in  some  codices 
and  editions  this  canon  is  lacking  altogether, 
one  on  the  right  of  the  Pope  to  receive  ap- 
peals taking  its  place.  As  this  canon  is  of 
considerable  length,  I  only  quote  the  inter- 
esting parts.] 

Whatever  presbyter  or  deacon  shall  put 
away  his  wife  without  the  offence  of  forniea- 


50 


I.  NICE.    A.D.  325 


tion,  or  for  any  other  cause  of  which  we  have 
spoken  above,  and  shall  cast  her  out  of  doors 
.  .  .  such  a  person  shall  be  cast  out  of  the 
clergy,  if  he  were  a  clergyman ;  if  a  layman 
he  shall  be  forbidden  the  communion  of  the 
faithful.  .  .  .  But  if  that  woman  [untruly 
charged  by  her  husband  with  adultery],  that 
is  to  say  his  wife,  spurns  his  society  on  ac- 
count of  the  injury  he  has  done  her  and  the 
charge  he  has  brought  against  her,  of  which 
she  is  innocent,  let  her  freely  be  put  away 
and  let  a  bill  of  repudiation  be  written  for 
her,  noting  the  false  accusation  which  had 
been  brought  against  her.  And  then  if  she 
should  wish  to  marry  some  other  faithful 
man,  it  is  right  for  her  to  do  so,  nor  does  the 
Church  forbid  it;  and  the  same  permission 
extends  as  well  to  men  as  to  women,  since 
there  is  equal  reason  for  it  for  each.  But  if 
he  shall  return  to  better  fruit  which  is  of  the 
same  kind,  and  shall  conciliate  to  himself  the 
love  and  benevolence  of  his  consort,  and  shall 
be  willing  to  return  to  his  pristine  friendship, 
his  fault  shall  be  condoned  to  him  after  he 
has  done  suitable  and  sufficient  penance. 
And  whoever  shall  speak  against  this  decree 
the  fathers  of  the  synod  excommunicate  him. 

Canon  LXVII. 

Of  having  two  wives  at  the  same  time,  and 
of  a  woman  who  is  one  of  the  faithful  marry- 
ing an  infidel ;  and  of  the  form  of  receiving 
her  to  penance. 

[Her  reception  back  is  conditioned  upon 
her  leaving  the  infidel  man.] 

Canon  LXVIII. 
Of  giving   in    marriage    to    an   infidel   a 
daughter  or   sister   without  her  knowledge 
and  contrary  to  her  wish. 

Canon  LXIX. 
Of  one  of  the  faithful  who  departs  from  the 
faith  through  lust  and  love  of  an  infidel ;  and 
of  the  form  of  receiving  him  back,  or  admit- 
ting him  to  penance. 

Canon  LXX. 

Of  the  hospital  to  be  established  in  every 
city,  and  of  the  choice  of  a  superintendent 
and  concerning  his  duties. 

[It  is  interesting  to  note  that  one  of  the 
duties  of  the  superintendent  is — "  That  if  the 
goods  of  the  hospital  are  not  sufficient  for  its 
expenses,  he  ought  to  collect  all  the  time  and 
from  all  Christians  provision  according  to 
the  ability  of  each."] 

Canon  LXXI. 
Of  the  placing  a  bishop  or  archbishop  in  his 
chair  after  ordination,  which  is  enthronization. 


Canon  LXXII. 
No  one  is  allowed  to  transfer  himself  to 
another  church  [i.e.,  diocese]  than  that  in 
which  he  was  ordained  ;  and  what  is  to  be 
done  in  the  case  of  one  cast  out  forcibly  with- 
out any  blame  attaching  to  him. 

Canon  LXXIII. 
The  laity  shall  not  choose  for  themselves 
priests  in  the  towns  and  villages  without  the 
authority  of  the  chorepiscopus  ;  nor  an  abbot 
for  a  monastery  ;  and  that  no  one  should  give 
commands  as  to  wrho  should  be  elected  his 
successor  after  his  death,  and  when  this  is 
lawful  for  a  superior. 

Canon  LXXIV. 
How  sisters,  widows,  and  deaconesses 
should  be  made  to  keep  their  residence  in 
their  monasteries ;  and  of  the  system  of  in- 
structing them  ;  and  of  the  election  of  dea- 
conesses, and  of  their  duties  and  utility. 

Canon  LXXV. 
How  one  seeking  election  should  not  be 
chosen,  even  if  of  conspicuous  virtue  ;  and 
how  the  election  of  a  layman  to  the  aforesaid 
grades  is  not  prohibited,  and  that  those  chosen 
should  not  afterward  be  deprived  before  their 
deaths,  except  on  account  of  crime. 

Canon  LXXVI. 
Of   the   distinctive   garb    and    distinctive 
names  and  conversation  of  monks  and  nuns. 

Canon  LXXVII. 
That  a  bishop  convicted  of  adultery  or  of 
other  similar  crime  should  be  deposed  with- 
out hope  of  restoration  to  the  same  grade ; 
but  shall  not  be  excommunicated. 

Canon  LXXVIII. 
Of  presbyters  and  deacons  who  have  fallen 
only  once  into  adultery,  if  they  have  never 
been  married ;  and  of  the  same  when  fallen 
as  widowers,  aud  those  who  have  fallen,  all 
the  while  having  their  own  wives.  Also  of 
those  who  return  to  the  same  sin  as  well  wid- 
owers as  those  having  living  wives  ;  and  which 
of  these  ought  not  to  be  received  to  penance, 
and  which  once  only,  and  which  twice. 

Canon  LXXIX. 
Each  one  of  the  faithful  while  his  sin  is  yet 
not  public  should  be  mended  by  private  ex- 
hortation and  admonition  ;  if  he  will  not  profit 
by  this,  he  must  be  excommunicated. 

Canon  LXXX. 
Of  the  election  of  a  procurator  of  the  poor, 
and  of  his  duties, 


PROPOSED  ACTION  ON  CLERICAL  CELIBACY, 


[TJie  Acts  are  not  extant.] 


NOTES. 


Often  the  mind  of  a  deliberative  assembly 
is  as  clearly  shown  by  the  propositions  it  re- 
jects as  by  those  it  adopts,  and  it  would  seem 
that  this  doctrine  is  of  application  in  the  case 
of  the  asserted  attempt  at  this  Council  to  pass 
a  decree  forbidding  the  priesthood  to  live  in 
the  use  of  marriage.  This  attempt  is  said  to 
have  failed.    The  particulars  are  as  follows  : 

Hefele. 

(Hist.  Councils.  Vol.  I.,  pp.  435  el  seqq.) 

Socrates,  Sozomen,  and  Gelasius  affirm  that 
the  Synod  of  Nicrea,  as  well  as  that  of  Elvira 
(can.  33),  desired  to  pass  a  law  respecting 
celibacy.  This  law  was  to  forbid  all  bishops, 
priests  and  deacons  (Sozomen  adds  sub- 
deacons),  who  were  married  at  the  time  of 
their  ordination,  to  continue  to  live  with  their 
wives.  But,  say  these  historians,  the  law  was 
opposed  openly  and  decidedly  by  Paphnutius, 
bishop  of  a  city  of  the  Upper  Theba'is  in 
Egypt,  a  man  of  a  high  reputation,  who  had 
lost  an  eye  during  the  persecution  under 
Maximian.  He  was  also  celebrated  for  his 
miracles,  and  was  held  in  so  great  respect  by 
the  Emperor,  that  the  latter  often  kissed  the 
empty  socket  of  the  lost  eye.  Paphnutius 
declared  with  a  loud  voice,  "that  too  heavy 
a  yoke  ought  not  to  be  laid  upon  the  clergy  ; 
that  marriage  and  married  intercourse  are  of 
themselves  honourable  and  undefiled ;  that 
the  Church  ought  not  to  be  injured  by  an  ex- 
treme severity,  for  all  could  not  live  in  abso- 
lute continency  :  in  this  way  (by  not  prohibit- 
ing married  intercourse)  the  virtue  of  the 
wife  would  be  much  more  certainly  preserved 
(viz  the  wife  of  a  clergyman,  because  she 
might  find  injury  elsewhere,  if  her  husband 
withdrew  from  her  mari'ied  intercourse). 
The  intercourse  of  a  man  with  his  lawful  wife 
may  also  be  a  chaste  intercourse.  It  would 
therefore  be  sufficient,  according  to  the  ancient 
tradition  of  the  Church,  if  those  who  had 
taken  holy  orders  without  being  married  were 
prohibited  from  marrying  afterwards ;  but 
those  clergymen  who  had  been  married  only 
once  as  laymen,  were  not  to  be  separated  from 
their  wives  (Gelasius  adds,  or  being  only  a 
reader  or  cantor)."  This  discourse  of  Paph- 
nutius made  so  much  the  more  impression, 


because  he  had  never  lived  in  matrimony  him- 
self, and  had  had  no  conjugal  intercourse. 
Paphnutius,  indeed,  had  been  brought  up  in 
a  monastery,  and  his  great  purity  of  manners 
had  rendered  him  especially  celebrated. 
Therefore  the  Council  took  the  serious  words 
of  the  Egyptian  bishop  into  consideration, 
stopped  all  discussion  upon  the  law,  and  left 
to  each  cleric  the  responsibility  of  deciding 
the  point  as  he  would. 

If  this  account  be  true,  we  must  conclude 
that  a  law  was  proposed  to  the  Council  of 
Nicsea  the  same  as  one  which  had  been  carried 
twenty  years  joreviously  at  Elvira,  in  Sj>ain  ; 
this  coincidence  would  lead  us  to  believe  that 
it  was  the  Spaniard  Hosius  who  proposed  the 
law  respecting  celibacy  at  Nicsea.  The  dis- 
course ascribed  to  Paphnutius,  and  the  conse- 
quent decision  of  the  Synod,  agree  very  well 
with  the  text  of  the  Apostolic  Constitutions, 
and  with  the  whole  practice  of  the  Greek 
Church  in  respect  to  celibacy.  The  Greek 
Church  as  well  as  the  Latin  accepted  the  prin- 
ciple, that  whoever  had  taken  holy  orders  be- 
fore marriage,  ought  not  to  be  married  after- 
wards. In  the  Latin  Church,  bishops,  priests, 
deacons,  and  even  sub-deacons,  were  con- 
sidered to  be  subject  to  this  law,  because  the 
latter  were  at  a  very  early  period  reckoned 
among  the  higher  servants  of  the  Church, 
which  was  not  the  case  in  the  Greek  Church. 
The  Greek  Church  went  so  far  as  to  allow 
deacons  to  marry  after  their  ordination,  if 
previously  to  it  they  had  expressly  obtained 
from  their  bishop  permission  to  do  so.  The 
Council  of  Ancyra  affirms  this  (c.  10).  We 
see  that  the  Greek  Church  wishes  to  leave  the 
bishop  free  to  decide  the  matter  ;  but  in  refer- 
ence to  priests,  it  also  prohibited  them  from 
marrying  after  their  ordination.  Therefore, 
whilst  the  Latin  Church  exacted  of  those 
presenting  themselves  for  ordination,  even  as 
subdeacons,  that  they  should  not  continue  to 
live  with  their  wives  if  they  were  married,  the 
Greek  Church  gave  no  such  prohibition  ;  but 
if  the  wife  of  an  ordained  clergyman  died,  the 
Greek  Church  allowed  no  second  marriage. 
The  Apostolic  Constitutions  decided  this  point 
in  the  same  way.  To  leave  their  wives  from  a 
pretext  of  piety  was  also  forbidden  to  Greek 
priests  ;  and  the  Synod  of  Gangra  (c.  4)  took 


E    2 


52 


I.  NICE.    A.D.  325 


up  the  defence  of  married  priests  against  the 
Eustathians.  Eustathius,  however,  was  not 
alone  among  the  Greeks  in  opposing  the  mar- 
riage of  all  clerics,  and  in  desiring  to  introduce 
into  the  Greek  Church  the  Latin  discipline  on 
this  point.  St.  Epiphanius  also  inclined  tow- 
ards this  side.  The  Greek  Church  did  not, 
however,  adopt  this  rigour  in  reference  to 
priests,  deacons,  and  subdeacons,  but  by  de- 
grees it  came  to  be  required  of  bishops  and 
of  the  higher  order  of  clergy  in  general,  that 
they  should  live  in  celibacy.  Yet  this  was 
not  until  after  the  compilation  of  the  Aj)OS- 
tolic  Canons  (c.  5)  and  of  the  Constitutions  ; 
for  in  those  documents  mention  is  made  of 
bishops  living  in  wedlock,  and  Church  history 
shows  that  there  were  married  bishops,  for 
instance  Synesius,  in  the  fifth  century.  But 
it  is  fair  to  remark,  even  as  to  Synesius,  that 
he  made  it  an  express  condition  of  his  accep- 
tation, on  his  election  to  the  episcopate,  that 
he  might  continue  to  live  the  married  life. 
Thomassin  believes  that  Synesius  did  not 
seriously  require  this  condition,  and  only 
spoke  thus  for  the  sake  of  escaping  the  epis- 
cojDal  office  ;  which  would  seem  to  imply  that 
in  his  time  Greek  bishops  had  already  begun 
to  live  in  celibacy.  At  the  Trullan  Synod 
(c.  13.)  the  Greek  Church  finally  settled  the 
question  of  the  marriage  of  priests.  Baro- 
nius,  Valesius,  and  other  historians,  have  con- 
sidered the  account  of  the  part  taken  by  Paph- 
nutius  to  be  apocryphal.  Baronius  says, 
that  as  the  Council  of  Nicpea  in  its  third  canon 
gave  a  law  upon  celibacy,  it  is  quite  impossi- 
ble to  admit  that  it  would  alter  such  a  law  on 
account  of  Pajmnutius.  But  Baronius  is  mis- 
taken in  seeing  a  law  upon  celibacy  in  that 
third  canon  ;  he  thought  it  to  be  so,  because, 
when  mentioning  the  women  who  might  live 
in  the  clergyman's  house — his  mother,  sister, 
etc. — the  canon  does  not  say  a  word  about  the 
wife.  It  had  no  occasion  to  mention  her,  it 
was  referring  to  the  <tvicl<to.ktoi  whilst  these 
(TvvucrdKTOi  and  married  women  have  nothing  in 
common.  Natalis  Alexander  gives  this  anec- 
dote about  Paphnutius  in  full :  he  desired  to 
refute  Ballarmin,  who  considered  it  to  be  un- 
true and  an  invention  of  Socrates  to  please  the 
Novatians.  Natalis  Alexander  often  main- 
tains erroneous  opinions,  and  on  the  present 
question  he  deserves  no  confidence.  If,  as  St. 
Epiphanius  relates,  the  Novatians  maintained 
that  the  clergy  might  be  married  exactly  like 
the  laity,  it  cannot  be  said  that  Socrates  shared 
that  opinion,  since  he  says,  or  rather  makes 
Paphnutius  say,  that,  .according  to  ancient 
tradition,  those  not  married  at  the  time  of 
ordination   should   not   be   so  subsequently. 


Moreover,  if  it  may  be  said  that  Socrates  had 
a  partial  sympathy  with  the  Novatians,  he  cer- 
tainly cannot  be  considered  as  belonging  to 
them,  still  less  can  he  be  accused  of  falsifying 
history  in  their  favour.  He  may  sometimes 
have  propounded  erroneous  opinions,  but 
there  is  a  great  difference  between  that  and 
the  invention  of  a  whole  story.  Valesius  es- 
pecially makes  use  of  the  argument  exsilentio 
against  Socrates,  (a)  Bufinus,  he  says,  gives 
many  particulars  about  Paphnutius  in  his 
History  of  the  Church;  he  mentions  his  mar- 
tyrdom, his  miracles,  and  the  Emperor's  rev- 
erence for  him,  but  not  a  single  word  of  the 
business  about  celibacy.  (b)  The  name  of 
Paphnutius  is  wanting  in  the  list  of  Egyptian 
bishops  present  at  the  Synod.  These  two 
arguments  of  Valesius  are  weak  ;  the  second 
has  the  authority  of  Bufinus  himself  against 
it,  who  expressly  says  that  Bishop  Paphnu- 
tius was  present  at  the  Council  of  Nictea.  If 
Valesius  means  by  lists  only  the  signatures  at 
the  end  of  the  acts  of  the  Council,  this  proves 
nothing  ;  for  these  lists  are  very  imperfect, 
and  it  is  well  known  that  many  bishops  whose 
names  are  not  among  these  signatures  were 
present  at  Niesea.  This  argument  exsilentio 
is  evidently  insufficient  to  prove  that  the 
anecdote  about  Paphnutius  must  be  rejected 
as  false,  seeing  that  it  is  in  perfect  harmony 
with  the  practice  of  the  ancient  Church,  and 
especially  of  the  Greek  Church,  on  the  subject 
of  clerical  marriages.  On  the  other  hand, 
Thomassin  pretends  that  there  was  no  such 
practice,  and  endeavours  to  prove  by  quota- 
tions from  St.  Epiphanius,  St.  Jerome,  Euse- 
bius,  and  St.  John  Chrysostom,  that  even  in  the 
East  priests  who  were  married  at  the  time  of 
their  ordination  were  prohibited  from  continu- 
ing to  live  with  their  wives.  The  texts  quoted 
by  Thomassin  prove  only  that  the  Greeks  gave 
especial  honour  to  priests  living  in  perfect 
continency,  but  they  do  not  prove  that  this 
continence  was  a  duty  incumbent  upon  all 
priests  ;  and  so  much  the  less,  as  the  fifth  and 
twenty-fifth  Apostolic  canons,  the  fourth  canon 
of  Gangra,  and  the  thirteenth  of  the  Trullan 
Synod,  demonstrate  clearly  enough  what  was 
the  universal  custom  of  the  Greek  Church 
on  this  point.  Lupus  and  Phillips  explained 
the  words  of  Paphnutius  in  another  sense. 
According  to  them,  the  Egyptian  bishop  was 
not  speaking  in  a  general  way  ;  he  simply 
desired  that  the  contemplated  law  should  not 
include  the  subdeacons.  But  this  explanation 
does  not  agree  with  the  extracts  quoted  from 
Socrates,  Sozomen,  and  Gelasius,  who  believe 
Paphnutius  intended  deacons  and  priests  as 
well. 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325  53 


THE  SYNODAL  LETTER. 

(Found  in  Gelasius,  Historia  Concilii  Nicaeni,  lib.  II,  cap.  xxxiii.  ;  Socr.,  H.  E.,  lib.  I, 
cap.  6 ;  Thcodor.,  H.  E.,  lib.  I,  cap.  9.) 

To  the  Church  of  Alexandria,  by  the  grace  of  God,  holy  and  great ;  and  to  our  well- 
beloved  brethren,  the  orthodox  clergy  and  laity  throughout  Egypt,  and  Pentapolis,  and 
Lybia,  and  every  nation  under  heaven,  the  holy  and  great  synod,  the  bishops  assembled 
at  Nicea,  wish  health  in  the  Lord. 

Forasmuch  as  the  great  and  holy  Synod,  which  was  assembled  at  Nicea  through  the 
grace  of  Christ  and  our  most  religious  Sovereign  Constantine,  who  brought  us  together 
from  our  several  provinces  and  cities,  has  considered  matters  which  concern  the  faith  of 
the  Church,  it  seemed  to  us  to  be  necessary  that  certain  things  should  be  communicated 
from  lis  to  you  in  writing,  so  that  you  might  have  the  means  of  knowing  what  has  been 
mooted  and  investigated,  and  also  what  has  been  decreed  and  confirmed. 

First  of  all,  then,  in  the  presence  of  our  most  religious  Sovereign  Constantine,  inves- 
tigation was  made  of  matters  concerning  the  impiety  and  transgression  of  Arius  and  his 
adherents ;  and  it  was  unanimously  decreed  that  he  and  his  impious  opinion  should  be 
anathematized,  together  with  the  blasphemous  words  and  speculations  in  which  he  in- 
dulged, blaspheming  the  Son  of  God,  and  saying  that  he  is  from  things  that  are  not,  and 
that  before  he  was  begotten  he  was  not,  and  that  there  was  a  time  when  he  was  not,  and 
that  the  Son  of  God  is  by  his  free  will  capable  of  vice  and  virtue ;  saying  also  that  he  is 
a  creature.  All  these  things  the  holy  Synod  has  anathematized,  not  even  enduring  to 
hear  his  impious  doctrine  and  madness  and  blasphemous  words.  And  of  the  charges 
against  him  and  of  the  results  they  had,  ye  have  either  already  heard  or  will  hear  the 
particulars,  lest  we  should  seem  to  be  oppressing  a  man  who  has  in  fact  received  a  fitting 
recompense  for  his  own  sin.  So  far  indeed  has  his  impiety  prevailed,  that  he  has  even 
destroyed  Theonas  of  Marmorica  and  Secundas  of  Ptolemais ;  for  they  also  have  received 
the  same  sentence  as  the  rest. 

But  when  the  grace  of  God  had  delivered  Egypt  from  that  heresy  and  blasphemy, 
and  from  the  persons  who  have  dared  to  make  disturbance  and  division  among  a  people 
heretofore  at  peace,  there  remained  the  matter  of  the  insolence  of  Meletius  and  those 
who  have  been  ordained  by  him  ;  and  concerning  this  part  of  our  work  we  now,  beloved 
brethren,  proceed  to  inform  you  of  the  decrees  of  the  Synod.  The  Synod,  then,  being 
disposed  to  deal  gently  with  Meletius  (for  in  strict  justice  he  deserved  no  leniency), 
decreed  that  he  should  remain  in  his  own  city,  but  have  no  authority  either  to  ordain,  or 
to  administer  affairs,  or  to  make  appointments  ;  and  that  he  shoidd  not  appear  in  the 
country  or  in  any  other  city  for  this  purpose,  but  should  enjoy  the  bare  title  of  his  rank  ; 
but  that  those  who  have  been  placed  by  him,  after  they  have  been  confirmed  by  a  more 
sacred  laying  on  of  hands,  shall  on  these  conditions  be  admitted  to  communion :  that 
they  shall  both  have  their  rank  and  the  right  to  officiate,  but  that  they  shall  be  altogether 
the  inferiors  of  all  those  who  are  enrolled  in  any  church  or  parish,  and  have  been 
appointed  by  our  most  honourable  colleague  Alexander.  So  that  these  men  are  to  have 
no  authority  to  make  appointments  of  persons  who  may  be  pleasing  to  them,  nor  to 
suggest  names,  nor  to  do  anything  whatever,  without  the  consent  of  the  bishops  of  the 
Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church,  who  are  serving  under  our  most  holy  colleague  Alex- 
ander ;  while  those  who,  by  the  grace  of  God  and  through  your  prayers,  have  been  found 
in  no  schism,  but  on  the  contrary  are  without  spot  in  the  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church, 
are  to  have  authority  to  make  appointments  and  nominations  of  worthy  persons  among 
the  clergy,  and  in  short  to  do  all  things  according  to  the  law  and  ordinance  of  the 
Church.  But,  if  it  happen  that  any  of  the  clergy  who  are  now  in  the  Church  should  die, 
then  those  who  have  been  lately  received  are  to  succeed  to  the  office  of  the  deceased ; 
always  provided  that  they  shall  appear  to  be  worthy,  and  that  the  people  elect  them, 
and  that  the  bishop  of  Alexandria  shall  concur  in  the  election  and  ratify  it.  This  con- 
cession has  been  made  to  all  the  rest ;  but,  on  account  of  his  disorderly  conduct  from 
the  first,  and  the  rashness  and  precipitation  of  his  character,  the  same  decree  was  not 


54 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


made  concerning  Meletius  himself,  but  that,  inasmuch  as  he  is  a  man  capable  of  com- 
mitting again  the  same  disorders,  no  authority  nor  privilege  should  be  conceded  to  him. 

These  are  the  particulars,  which  are  of  special  interest  to  Egypt  and  to  the  most  holy 
Church  of  Alexandria ;  but  if  in  the  presence  of  our  most  honoured  lord,  our  colleague 
and  brother  Alexander,  anything  else  has  been  enacted  by  canon  or  other  decree,  he  will 
himself  convey  it  to  you  in  greater  detail,  he  having  been  both  a  guide  and  fellow-worker 
in  what  has  been  done. 

"We  further  proclaim  to  you  the  good  news  of  the  agreement  concerning  the  holy 
Easter,  that  this  particular  also  has  through  your  prayers  been  rightly  settled ;  so  that 
all  our  brethren  in  the  East  who  formerly  followed  the  custom  of  the  Jews  are  hence- 
forth to  celebrate  the  said  most  sacred  feast  of  Easter  at  the  same  time  with  the  Romans 
and  yourselves  and  all  those  who  have  observed  Easter  from  the  beginning. 

Wherefore,  rejoicing  in  these  wholesome  results,  and  in  our  common  peace  and 
harmony,  and  in  the  cutting  off  of  every  heresy,  receive  ye  with  the  greater  honour  and 
with  increased  love,  our  colleague  your  Bishop  Alexander,  who  has  gladdened  us  by 
his  presence,  and  who  at  so  great  an  age  has  undergone  so  great  fatigue  that  peace 
might  be  established  among  you  and  all  of  us.  Pray  ye  also  for  us  all,  that  the  things 
which  have  been  deemed  advisable  may  stand  fast ;  for  they  have  been  done,  as  we 
believe,  to  the  well-pleasing  of  Almighty  God  and  of  his  only  Begotten  Son,  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  to  whom  be  glory  for  ever.     Amen. 


On  the  Keeping  op  Eastee. 

From  the  Letter  of  the  Emperor  to  all  those 
not  present  at  the  Council. 

(Found  in  Eusebius,  Vita  Const.,  Lib.  Hi., 
18-20.) 

When  the  question  relative  to  the  sacred 
festival  of  Easter  arose,  it  was  universally 
thought  that  it  would  be  convenient  that  all 
should  keep  the  feast  on  one  day  ;  for  what 
could  be  more  beautiful  and  more  desirable, 
than  to  see  this  festival,  through  which  we  re- 
ceive the  hope  of  immortality,  celebrated  by 
all  with  one  accord,  and  in  the  same  manner  ? 
It  was  declared  to  be  particularly  unworthy 
for  this,  the  holiest  of  all  festivals,  to  follow 
the  custom  [the  calculation]  of  the  Jews,  who 
had  soiled  their  hands  with  the  most  fearful 
of  crimes,  and  whose  minds  were  blinded.  In 
rejecting  their  custom,1  we  may  transmit  to 
our  descendants  the  legitimate  mode  of  cele- 
brating Easter,  which  we  have  observed  from 
the  time  of  the  Saviour's  Passion  to  the  pres- 
ent day  [according  to  the  day  of  the  week]. 
We  ought  not,  therefore,  to  have  anything  in 
common  with  the  Jews,  for  the  Saviour  has 
shown  us  another  way  ;  our  worship  follows 
a  more  legitimate  and  more  convenient  course 
(the  order  of  the  days  of  the  week)  ;  and  con- 
sequently, in  unanimously  adopting  this  mode, 
we  desire,  dearest  brethren,  to  separate  our- 
selves from  the  detestable  company  of  the 
Jews,  for  it  is  truly  shameful  for  us  to  hear 

1  We  must  read  ISovs,  not  efli/ovs,  as  the  Mayence  impression 
of  the  edition  ol  Valerius  has  it. 


them  boast  that  without  their  direction  we 
could  not  keep  this  feast.     How  can  they  be  in 
the  right,  they  who,  after  the  death  of  the 
Saviour,  have  no  longer  been  led  by  reason  but 
by  wild  violence,  as  their  delusion  may  urge 
them  ?   They  do  not  possess  the  truth  in  this 
Easter  question ;  for,  in  their  blindness  and 
repugnance    to  all  improvements,  they  fre- 
quently celebrate  two  passovers  in  the  same 
year.     We  could  not  imitate  those  who  are 
openly  in  error.     How,  then,  could  we  follow 
these  Jews,  who  are  most  certainly  blinded  by 
error  ?  for  to  celebrate  the  passover  twice  in 
one  year  is  totally  inadmissible.     But  even  if 
this  were  not  so,  it  would  still  be  your  duty 
not  to  tarnish  your  soul  by  communications 
with  such  wicked  people  [the  Jews].     Besides, 
consider  well,  that  in  such  an  important  mat- 
ter, and  on  a  subject  of  such  great  solemnity, 
j  there    ought  not  to   be   any   division.     Our 
Saviour  has  left  us  only  one  festal  day  of  our 
i  redemption,  that  is  to  say,  of  his  holy  passion, 
and  he  desired  [to  establish]  only  owe  Catholic 
Church.    Think,  then,  how  unseemly  it  is,  that 
on  the  same  day  some  should  be  fasting  whilst 
i  others  are  seated  at  a  banquet  ;  and  that  after 
j  Easter,  some  should   be   rejoicing  at  feasts, 
whilst  others  are  still  observing  a  strict  fast. 
For  this  reason,  a  Divine  Providence  wills  that 
:  this  custom  should  be  rectified  and  regulated 
!  in  a  uniform  way  ;  and  everyone,  I  hope,  will 
agree  upon  this  point.     As,  on  the  one  hand, 
it  is  our  duty  not  to  have  anything  in  common 
with  the  murderers  of  our  Lord  ;  and  as,  on 
j  the  other,  the  custom  now  followed  by  the 
.  Churches  of  the  West,  of  the  South,  and  of 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325  55 


the  North,  and  by  some  of  those  of  the  East, 
is  the  most  acceptable,  it  has  appeared  good 
to  all ;  and  I  have  been  guarantee  for  your 
consent,  that  you  would  accept  it  with  joy,  as 
it  is  followed  at  Rome,  in  Africa,  in  all  Italy, 
Egypt,  Spain,  Gaul,  Britain,  Libya,  in  all 
Achaia,  and  in  the  dioceses  of  Asia,  of  Pontus, 
and  Cilicia.  You  should  consider  not  only 
that  the  number  of  churches  in  these  prov- 
inces make  a  majority,  but  also  that  it  is  right 
to  demand  what  our  reason  approves,  and  that 
we  should  have  nothing  in  common  with  the 
Jews.  To  sum  up  in  few  words  :  By  the 
unanimous  judgment  of  all,  it  has  been  de- 
cided that  the  most  holy  festival  of  Easter 
should  be  everywhere  celebrated  on  one  and 


holy  a  thing  there  should  be  any  division.  As 
this  is  the  state  of  the  case,  accept  joyfully  the 
divine  favour,  and  this  truly  divine  command  ; 
for  all  which  takes  place  in  assemblies  of  the 
bishops  ought  to  be  regarded  as  proceeding 
from  the  will  of  God.  Make  known  to  your 
brethren  what  has  been  decreed,  keep  this 
most  holy  day  according  to  the  prescribed 
mode ;  Ave  can  thus  celebrate  this  holy  Easter 
day  at  the  same  time,  if  it  is  granted  me,  as  I 
desire,  to  unite  myself  with  you  ;  we  can  re- 
joice together,  seeing  that  the  divine  power 
has  made  use  of  our  instrumentality  for  de- 
stroying the  evil  designs  of  the  devil,  and 
thus  causing  faith,  peace,  and  unity  to  flour- 
ish amongst  us.     May  God  graciously  protect 


the  same  day,  and  it  is  not  seemly  that  in  so  I  you,  my  beloved  brethren. 

EXCURSUS  ON  THE  SUBSEQUENT  HISTORY  OF  THE  EASTER  QUESTION. 
(Hefele  :  Hist,  of  the  Councils,  Vol.  I.,  pp.  328  et  seqq.) 

The  differences  in  the  way  of  fixing  the  period  of  Easter  did  not  indeed  disappear  after 
the  Council  of  Nicea.  Alexandria  and  Rome  could  not  agree,  either  because  one  of  the  two 
Churches  neglected  to  make  the  calculation  for  Easter,  or  because  the  other  considered  it 
inaccurate.  It  is  a  fact,  proved  by  the  ancient  Easter  table  of  the  Roman  Church,  that 
the  cycle  of  eighty-four  years  continued  to  be  used  at  Rome  as  before.  Now  this  cycle  dif- 
fered in  many  ways  from  the  Alexandrian,  and  did  not  always  agree  with  it  about  the  period 
for  Easter — in  fact  (a),  the  Romans  used  quite  another  method  from  the  Alexandrians  ;  they 
calculated  from  the  epact,  and  began  from  the  feria  prima  of  January,  (b.)  The  Romans 
were  mistaken  in  placing  the  full  moon  a  little  too  soon  ;  whilst  the  Alexandrians  placed  it 
a  little  too  late,  (c.)  At  Rome  the  equinox  was  supposed  to  fall  on  March  18th  ;  whilst  the 
Alexandrians  placed  it  on  March  21st.  (d.)  Finally,  the  Romans  differed  in  this  from  the 
Greeks  also ;  they  did  not  celebrate  Easter  the  next  day  when  the  full  moon  fell  on  the 
Saturday. 

Even  the  year  following  the  Council  of  Nicea — that  is,  in  32G — as  well  as  in  the  years  330, 
333,  340,  341,  343,  the  Latins  celebrated  Easter  on  a  different  day  from  the  Alexandrians. 
In  order  to  put  an  end  to  this  misunderstanding,  the  Synod  of  Sardica  in  343,  as  we  learn 
from  the  newly  discovered  festival  letters  of  S.  Athanasius,  took  up  again  the  question  of 
Easter,  and  brought  the  two  parties  (Alexandrians  and  Romans)  to  regulate,  by  means  of 
mutual  concessions,  a  common  day  for  Easter  for  the  next  fifty  years.  This  compromise, 
after  a  few  years,  was  not  observed.  The  troubles  excited  by  the  Arian  heresy,  and  the 
division  which  it  caused  between  the  East  and  the  West,  prevented  the  decree  of  Sardica 
from  being  put  into  execution  ;  therefore  the  Emperor  Theodosius  the  Great,  after  the 
re-establishment  of  peace  in  the  Church,  found  himself  obliged  to  take  fresh  steps  for 
obtaining  a  complete  uniformity  in  the  manner  of  celebrating  Easter.  In  387,  the  Romans 
having  kept  Easter  on  March  21st,  the  Alexandrians  did  not  do  so  for  five  weeks  later — that 
is  to  say,  till  April  25th — because  with  the  Alexandrians  the  equinox  was  not  till  March  21st. 
The  Emperor  Theodosius  the  Great  then  asked  Theophilus,  Bishop  of  Alexandria  for  an 
explanation  of  the  difference.  The  bishop  responded  to  the  Emperor's  desire,  and  drew  up 
a  chronological  table  of  the  Easter  festivals,  based  upon  the  principles  acknowledged  by  the 
Church  of  Alexandria.    Unfortunately,  we  now  possess  only  the  prologue  of  his  work. 


56 


I.  NICE.     A.D.  325 


Upon  an  invitation  from  Rome,  S.  Ambrose  also  mentioned  the  period  of  this  same 
Easter  in  387,  in  his  letter  to  the  bishops  of  iEuiilia,  and  he  sides  with  the  Alexandrian 
computation.  Cyril  of  Alexandria  abridged  the  paschal  table  of  his  uncle  Theophilus,  and 
fixed  the  time  for  the  ninety-five  following  Easters — that  is,  from  436  to  531  after  Christ. 
Besides  this  Cyril  showed,  in  a  letter  to  the  Pope,  what  was  defective  in  the  Latin  calcula- 
tion ;  and  this  demonstration  was  taken  up  again,  some  time  after,  by  order  of  the  Emperor, 
by  Paschasinus,  Bishop  of  Lilybseum  and  Proterius  of  Alexandria,  in  a  letter  written  by 
them  to  Pope  Leo  I.  In  consequence  of  these  communications,  Pope  Leo  often  gave  the 
preference  to  the  Alexandrian  computation,  instead  of  that  of  the  Church  of  Rome.  At  the 
same  time  also  was  generally  established,  the  opinion  so  little  entertained  by  the  ancient 
authorities  of  the  Church — one  might  even  say,  so  strongly  in  contradiction  to  their  teach- 
ing— that  Christ  partook  of  the  passover  on  the  14th  Nisan,  that  he  died  on  the  15th  (not 
on  the  14th,  as  the  ancients  considered),  that  he  lay  in  the  grave  on  the  16th,  and  rose 
again  on  the  17th.  In  the  letter  we  have  just  mentioned,  Proterius  of  Alexandria  openly 
admitted  all  these  different  points. 

Some  years  afterwards,  in  457,  Victor  of  Aquitane,  by  order  of  the  Roman  Archdeacon 
Hilary,  endeavoured  to  make  the  Roman  and  the  Alexandrian  calculations  agree  together. 
It  has  been  conjectured  that  subsequently  Hilary,  when  Pope,  brought  Victor's  calculation 
into  use,  in  456 — that  is,  at  the  time  when  the  cycle  of  eighty -four  years  came  to  an  end. 
In  the  latter  cycle  the  new  moons  were  marked  more  accurately,  and  the  chief  differences 
existing  between  the  Latin  and  Greek  calculations  disappeared  ;  so  that  the  Easter  of  the 
Latins  generally  coincided  with  that  of  Alexandria,  or  was  only  a  very  little  removed  from 
it.  In  cases  when  the  iS'  fell  on  a  Saturday,  Victor  did  not  wish  to  decide  whether  Easter 
should  be  celebrated  the  next  day,  as  the  Alexandrians  did,  or  should  be  postponed  for  a 
week.  He  indicates  both  dates  in  his  table,  and  leaves  the  Pope  to  decide  what  was  to  be 
done  in  each  separate  case.  Even  after  Victor's  calculations,  there  still  remained  great  dif- 
ferences in  the  manner  of  fixing  the  celebration  of  Easter  ;  and  it  was  Dionysius  the  Less 
who  first  completely  overcame  them,  by  giving  to  the  Latins  a  paschal  table  having  as  its 
basis  the  cycle  of  nineteen  years.  This  cycle  perfectly  corresponded  to  that  of  Alexandria, 
and  thus  established  that  harmony  which  had  been  so  long  sought  in  vain.  He  showed  the 
advantages  of  his  calculation  so  strongly,  that  it  was  admitted  by  Rome  and  by  the  whole  of 
Italy  ;  whilst  almost  the  whole  of  Gaul  remained  faithful  to  Victor's  canon,  and  Great  Britain 
still  held  the  cycle  of  eighty-four  years,  a  little  improved  by  Stilpicius  Severus.-  "When  the 
Heptarchy  Avas  evangelized  by  the  Roman  missionaries,  the  new  converts  accepted  the  cal- 
culation of  Dionysius,  whilst  the  ancient  Churches  of  Wales  held  fast  their  old  tradition. 
From  this  arose  the  well-known  British  dissensions  about  the  celebration  of  Easter,  which 
were  transplanted  by  Columban  into  Gaul.  In  729,  the  majority  of  the  ancient  British 
Churches  accepted  the  cycle  of  nineteen  years.  It  had  before  been  introduced  into  Spain, 
immediately  after  the  conversion  of  Reccared.  Finally,  under  Charles  the  Great,  the  cycle 
of  nineteen  years  triumphed  over  all  opposition  ;  and  thus  the  whole  of  Christendom  was 
united,  for  the  Quartodecimans  had  gradually  disappeared.1 


1  It  is  curious  that  after  all  the  attempts  that  have  been  made 
to  get  this  matter  settled,  the  Church  is  still  separated  into  East 
and  West— the  latter  having  accepted  the  Gregorian  Calendar 
from  which  the  Eastern  Church,  still  using  the  Julian  Calendar, 


differs  in  being  twelve  days  behind.  And  even  in  the  West 
we  have  succeeded  in  breaking  the  spirit  of  the  Jficene  decree, 
for  in  1S25  the  Christian  Easter  coincided  with  the  Jewish  Pass- 
over ! 


THE  CANONS  OP  THE  COUNCILS  OF  ANCYRA,  GANGRA, 
NEOC^ESAREA,  ANTIOCH  AND  LAODICEA,  WHICH  CAN- 
ONS WERE  ACCEPTED  AND  RECEIVED  BY  THE  ECU- 
MENICAL SYNODS. 


59 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE  TO  THE  CANONS  OF  THE  PROVINCIAL  SYNODS 
WHICH  IN  THIS  VOLUME  ARE  INTERJECTED  BETWEEN  THE  FIRST 
AND  THE   SECOND   ECUMENICAL   COUNCILS. 

The  First  Canon  of  the  Fourth  Ecumenical  Council,  Chalcedon,  reads  as  follows :  "  We 
have  judged  it  right  that  the  canons  of  the  Holy  Fathers  made  in  every  synod  even  until 
now,  should  remain  in' force."  And  the  Council  in  Trullo,  in  its  second  canon,  has  enu- 
merated these  synods  in  the  following  words.  "We  set  our  seal  to  all  the  rest  of  the  canons 
which  have  been  established  by  our  holy  and  blessed  fathers,  that  is  to  say  by  the  318  God- 
inspired  fathers  who  met  at  Nice,  and  by  those  who  met  at  Ancyra,  and  by  those  who  met 
at  Neocsesarea,  as  well  as  by  those  who  met  at  Gangra :  in  addition  to  these  the  canons 
adopted  by  those  who  met  at  Antioch  in  Syria,  and  by  those  who  met  at  Laodicea  in  Phry- 
gia  ;  moreover  by  the  150  fathers  who  assembled  in  this  divinely  kept  and  imperial  city, 
and  by  the  200  who  were  gathered  in  the  metropolis  of  Ephesus,  and  by  the  630  holy  and 
blessed  fathers  who  met  at  Chalcedon,"  etc.,  etc. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  this  collection  of  canons  was  made  at  a  very  early  date,  and 
from  the  fact  that  the  canons  of  the  First  Council  of  Constantinople  do  not  appear,  as  they 
naturally  would,  immediately  after  those  of  Nice,  Ave  may  not  improbably  conclude  that  the 
collection  was  formed  before  that  council  assembled.  For  it  will  be  noticed  that  Nice, 
although  not  the  earliest  in  date,  takes  the  precedence  as  being  of  ecumenical  rank.  And 
this  is  expressly  stated  in  the  caption  to  the  canons  of  Ancyra  according  to  the  reading  in  the 
Paris  Edition  of  Balsamon.  "  The  canons  of  the  holy  Fathers  who  assembled  at  Ancyra  ; 
which  are  indeed  older  than  those  made  at  Nice,  but  placed  after  them,  on  account  of  the 
authority  [avdevria.v)  of  the  Ecumenical  Sjaiod." 

On  the  arrangement  of  this  code  much  has  been  written  and  Archbishop  Ussher  has 
made  some  interesting  suggestions,  but  all  appear  to  be  attended  with  more  or  less  difficul- 
ties. The  reader  will  find  in  Bp:  Beveridge,  in  the  Prolegomena  to  his  Synodicon  a  very 
full  treatment  of  the  point,1  the  gist  of  the  matter  is  admirably  given  in  the  following  brief 
note  which  I  take  from  Hammond.     In  speaking  of  this  early  codex  of  the  Church  he  says  : 

(Hammond,  Definitions  of  Faith  mid  Canons  of  Discipline,  pp.  134  and  135.) 

That  this  collection  was  made  and  received  by  the  Church  previous  to  the  Council  of 
Chalcedon  is  evident  from  the  manner  in  which  several  of  the  Canons  are  quoted  in  that 
Council.  Thus  in  the  4th  Action,  in  the  matter  of  Carosus  and  Dorotheus,  who  had  ac- 
knowledged Dioscorus  as  Bishop,  though  he  had  been  deposed  from  his  bishopric,  "  the 
holy  Synod  said,  let  the  holy  Canons  of  the  Fathers  be  read,  and  inserted  in  the  records  ; 
and  Actius  the  Archdeacon  taking  the  book  read  the  83d  Canon,  If  any  Bishops,  etc.  And 
again  the  84th  Canon,  concerning  those  who  separate  themselves,  If  any  Presbyter,"  etc. 
These  Canons  are  the  4th  and  5th  of  Antioch.  Again,  in  the  11th  Action,  in  the  matter  of 
Bassianus  and  Stephanus  who  disputed  about  the  Bishopric  of  Ephesus,  both  requested  the 
Canons  to  be  read,  "  And  the  Judges  said,  Let  the  Canons  be  read.  And  Leontius  Bishop 
of  Magnesia  read  the  95th  Canon,  If  any  Bishop,  etc.,  and  again  out  of  the  same  book  the 
9Gth  Canon,  If  any  Bishop,"  etc.  These  Canons  are  the  lGth  and  17th  of  Antioch.  Now  if 
we  add  together  the  different  Canons  in  the  Code  of  the  Universal  Church  in  the  order  in 
which  they  follow  in  the  enumeration  of  them  by  the  Council  of  Trullo  and  in  other  docu- 
ments, we  find  that  the  4th  and  5th  of  Antioch,  are  the  83d  and  84th  of  the  whole  Code,  and 

1  Beveridge,  Synodicon.,  torn.  I.,  p.  vi.  et  scqq.  (Bev.  Works,  torn,  II.,  Append,  p.  xiii.  ct  seqq.  [Anglo, -Cath.  Lib.]). 


60  INTRODUCTORY   NOTE 


the  16tli  and  17th  of  Antioch,  the  95th  and  9Gth.  Nice  20,  Ancyra  25,  Neoctesarea  14,  Gan- 
gra  20  ;  all  which  make  79.  Next  come  those  of  Antioch,  the  4th  and  5th  of  which  there- 
fore, will.be  respectively  the  83d  and  84th,  and  the  16th  and  17th  the  95th  and  96th. 

The  fact  of  the  existence  of  such  a  code  does  not  prove  by  any  means  that  it  was  the 
only  collection  extant  at  the  time  nor  that  it  was  universally  known.  In  fact  we  have  good 
reason,  as  we  shall  see  in  connexion  with  the  Council  of  Sardica,  to  believe  that  in  many 
codices,  probably  especially  in  the  West,  the  canons  of  that  council  followed  immediately 
after  those  of  Nice,  and  that  without  any  break  or  note  whatever.  But  we  know  that  the 
number  of  canons  attributed  to  Nice  must  have  been  twenty  or  else  the  numbering  of  the 
codex  read  from  at  Chalcedon  would  be  quite  inexplicable.  It  would  naturally  suggest 
itself  to  the  mind  that  possibly  the  divergence  in  the  canonical  codes  was  the  result  of  the 
local  feeling's  of  East  and  West  with  regard  to  the  decrees  of  Sardica.  But  this  supposition, 
plausible  as  it  appears,  must  be  rejected,  since  at  the  Quinisext  Council,  where  it  is  not  dis- 
puted there  was  a  strong  anti-Western  bias,  the  canons  of  Sardica  are  expressly  enumerated 
among  those  which  the  fathers  receive  as  of  Ecumenical  authority.  It  will  be  noticed  that 
the  code  set  forth  by  the  Council  in  Trullo  differs  from  the  code  used  at  Chalcedon  by  hav- 
ing the  so-called  "  Canons  of  the  Apostles  "  prefixed  to  it,  and  by  having  a  large  number  of 
other  canons,  including  those  of  Sardica,  appended,  of  which  more  will  be  said  when  treating 
of  that  Council. 

The  order  which  I  have  followed  may  justly  be  considered  as  that  of  the  earliest  accepted 
codex  canonum,  at  least  of  the  East. 


THE   COUNCIL  OF  ANCYRA 

A.D.  314. 
Emperors.  — Constantine  and  Licinius. 

Elenchus. 

Historical  Note.  TJie  Canons  with  the  Ancient  Epitome  and  Notes. 

Excursus  to  Canon  XIX  on  Digamy. 


HISTORICAL  NOTE. 

Soon  after  the  death  of  the  Emperor  Maximin,1  a  council  was  held  at  Ancyra,  the  capital 
of  Galatia.  Only  about  a  dozen  bishops  were  present,  and  the  lists  of  subscriptions  which 
are  found  appended  to  the  canons  are  not  to  be  depended  on,  being  evidently  in  their 
present  form  of  later  authorship  ;  as  has  been  shewn  by  the  Ballerini.  If  we  may  at  all  trust 
the  lists,  it  would  seem  that  nearly  every  part  of  Syria  and  Asia  Minor  was  represented,  and 
that  therefore  the  council  while  small  in  numbers  was  of  considerable  weight.  It  is  not  cer- 
tain whether  Vitalis,  (bishop  of  Antioch,)  presided  or  Marcellus,  who  was  at  the  time  bishop 
of  Ancyra.     The  honour  is  by  the  Libellus  Synodicus  assigned  to  the  latter. 

The  disciplinary  decrees  of  this  council  possess  a  singular  interest  as  being  the  first  en- 
acted after  the  ceasing  of  the  persecution  of  the  Christians  and  as  providing  for  the  proper 
treatment  of  the  lapsed.  Recently  two  papyri  have  been  recovered,  containing  the  official 
certificates  granted  by  the  Roman  government  to  those  who  had  lapsed  and  offered  sacrifice. 
These  apostates  were  obliged  to  acknowledge  in  public  their  adhesion  to  the  national  relig- 
ion of  the  empire,  and  then  were  provided  with  a  document  certifying  to  this  fact  to  keep 
them  from  further  trouble.  Dr.  Harnack  (Preussische  Jahrbiichcr)  writing  of  the  yielding  of 
the  lapsed  says  : 

"  The  Church  condemned  this  as  lying  and  denial  of  the  faith,  and  after  the  termination  of 
the  persecution,  these  unhappy  people  were  partly  excommunicated,  partly  obliged  to  sub- 
mit to  severe  discipline.  Who  would  ever  suppose  that  the  records  of  their  shame  would 
come  down  to  our  time  ? — and  yet  it  has  actually  happened.  Two  of  these  papers  have 
been  preserved,  contrary  to  all  likelihood,  by  the  sands  of  Egypt  which  so  carefully  keep 
what  has  been  entrusted  to  them.  The  first  was  found  by  Krebs  in  a  heap  of  papyrus,  that 
had  come  to  Berlin ;  the  other  was  found  by  Wessely  in  the  papyrus  collection  of  Archduke 
Rainer.  '  I,  Diogenes,  have  constantly  sacrificed  and  made  offerings,  and  have  eaten  in  your 
presence  the  sacrificial  meat,  and  I  petition  you  to  give  me  a  certificate.'  Who  to-day,  with- 
out deep  emotion,  can  read  this  paper  and  measure  the  trouble  and  terror  of  heart  under 
which  the  Christians  of  that  day  collapsed  ?  " 

1  Not  "  Maximilian,"  as  in  the  English  translation  of  Hefele's  I  imian  died  in  310,  Galerius  iu  311,  Muxentius  in  312.  and  Dlocle- 
Ristory  of  the  Councils,  Vol.1,,  p.  199  (revised  edition).    Max-  |  tian  in  313. 


03 


THE  CANONS  OF  THE  COUNCIL  OF  ANCYRA. 


{Found  in  Labbe  and  Cossart's  Concilia,  and  all  Collections,  in  the  Greek  text  together 
with  several  Latin  versions  of  different  dates.  Also  in  Justellus  and  Beveridge.  There 
will  also  be  found  annotations  by  Month,  and  a  reprint  of  the  notes  of  Christopher  Justellus 
and  of  Bp.  Beveridge  hi  Vol.  IV.  of  the  Reliquiae  Sacrse,  ed.  altera,  1846.) 

CANON  I. 

With  regard  to  those  presbyters  who  have  offered  sacrifices  and  afterwards  returned 
to  the  conflict,  not  with  hypocrisy,  but  in  sincerity,  it  has  seemed  good  that  they  may 
retain  the  honour  of  their  chair ;  provided  they  had  not  used  management,  arrangement, 
or  persuasion,  so  as  to  appear  to  be  subjected  to  the  torture,  when  it  was  applied  only 
in  seeming  and  pretence.  Nevertheless  it  is  not  lawful  for  them  to  make  the  oblation, 
nor  to  preach,  nor  in  short  to  perform  any  act  of  sacerdotal  function. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  to  Canons  I.  and  II. 

Presbyters  and  deacons  ivho  offered  sacrifice 
and  afterwards  renewed  the  contest  for  the  truth 
shall  have  only  their  seat  and  honour,  but  shall 
wot  perform  any  of  the  holy  functions. 

Zonaeas. 
Of  those  that  yielded  to  the  tyrants  in  the 
persecution,  and  offered  sacrifice,  some,  after 
having  been  subjected  to  torture,  being  un- 
able to  withstand  to  the  end  its  force  and  in- 
tensity, were  conquered,  and  denied  the  faith  ; 
some,  through  effeminacy,  before  they  expe- 
rienced any  suffering,  gave  way,  and  lest  they 
should  seem  to  sacrifice  voluntarily  they  per- 
suaded the  executioners,  either  by  bribes  or 
entreaties,  to  manifest  perhaps  a  greater  de- 
gree of  severity  against  them,  and  seemingly 
to  ajaply  the  torture  to  them,  in  order  that 
sacrificing  under  these  circumstances  they 
might  seem  to  have  denied  Christ,  conquered 
by  force,  and  not  through  effeminacy. 


Hefele. 


It  was  quite  justifiable,  and  in  accordance 
with  the  ancient  and  severe  discipline  of  the 
Church,  when  this  Synod  no  longer  allowed 
priests,  even  when  sincerely  penitent,  to  dis- 
charge priestly  functions.  It  was  for  this 
same  reason  that  the  two  Spanish  bishops, 
Martial  and  Basilides,  were  deposed,  and  that 
the  judgment  given  against  them  was  con- 
firmed in  254  by  an  African  synod  held  under 
St.  Cyprian. 

The  reader  will  notice  how  clearly  the  func- 
tions of  a  presbyter  are  set  forth  in  this  canon 
as  they  were  understood  at  that  time,  they 
were  "to  offer"  (Trpovfyipeiv),  "to  preach" 
(6/xiAeu'),  and  "  to  perform  any  act  of  sacer- 
dotal function  "  (XeiTOvpyeiv  ti  twv  lepaTiKwv  Aet- 
rovpyimf 

This  canon  is  in  the  Corpus  Juris  Canonici. 
Decretum.     Pars  I.,  Dist.  1.,  c.  xxxii 


CANON  II. 

It  is  likewise  decreed  that  deacons  who  have  sacrificed  and  afterwards  resumed  the 
conflict,  shall  enjoy  their  other  honours,  but  shall  abstain  from  every  sacred  ministry, 
neither  bringing  forth  the  bread  and  the  cup,  nor  making  proclamations.  Nevertheless, 
if  any  of  the  bishops  shall  observe  in  them  distress  of  mind  and  meek  humiliation,  it 
shall  be  lawful  to  the  bishops  to  grant  more  indulgence,  or  to  take  away  [what  has  been 
granted]. 


For  Ancient   Epitome 
Canon  I. 


see    above   under 


In  this  canon  the  work  and  office  of  a  dea- 
con as  then  understood  is  set  forth,  viz,:  "to 


bring  forth  "  (whatever  that  may  mean)  "  bread 
or  wine  "  (aprov  ?)  TTOTrjpwv  avcufilpeiv)  and  "  to 
act  the  herald  "  (Krjpvaa-eiv).  There  is  con- 
siderable difference  of  opinion  as  to  the  mean- 
ing of  the  first  of  these  expressions.     It  was 


64 


ANCYEA.    A.D.  314 


always  the  duty  of  the  deacon  to  serve  the 
priest,  especially  when  he  ministered  the  Holy 
Communion,  but  this  phrase  may  refer  to  one 
of  two  such  ministrations,  either  to  bringing 
the  bread  and  wine  to  the  priest  at  the  offer- 
tory, and  this  is  the  view  of  Van  Espen,  or 
to  the  distribution  of  the  Holy  Sacrament  to 
the  people.  It  has  been  urged  that  the  dea- 
con had  ceased  to  administer  the  species  of 
bread  before  the  time  of  this  council,  but 
Hefele  shews  that  the  custom  had  not  en- 
tirely died  out. 
If  I  may  be  allowed  to  offer  a  suggestion, 


the  use  of  the  disjunctive  ?)  seems  rather  to 
point  to  the  administration  of  the  sacrament 
than  to  the  bringing  of  the  oblations  at  the 
offertory. 

The  other  diaconal  function  "to  act  the 
herald"  refers  to  the  reading  of  the  Holy 
Gospel,  and  to  the  numerous  proclamations 
made  by  the  deacons  at  mass  both  according 
to  the  Greek  and  Latin  Rite. 

This  canon  is  in  the  Corpus  Juris  Canonici 
united  with  the  foregoing.  Decretum.,  Pars  I., 
Dist.  1.,  c.  xxxii. 


canon  in. 

Those  who  have  fled  and  been  apprehended,  or  have  been  betrayed  by  their  servants ; 
or  those  who  have  been  otherwise  despoiled  of  their  goods,  or  have  endured  tortures,  or 
have  been  imprisoned  and  abused,  declaring  themselves  to  be  Christians ;  or  who  have 
been  forced  to  receive  something  which  their  persecutors  violently  thrust  into  their 
hands, or  meat  [offered  to  idols],  continually  professing  that  they  were  Christians;  and 
who,  by  their  whole  apparel,  and  demeanour,  and  humility  of  life,  always  give  evidence 
of  grief  at  what  has  happened ;  these  persons,  inasmuch  as  they  are  free  from  sin,  are 
not  to  be  repelled  from  the  communion ;  and  if,  through  an  extreme  strictness  or 
ignorance  of  some  things,  they  have  been  repelled,  let  them  forthwith  be  re-admitted. 
This  shall  hold  good  alike  of  clergy  and  laity.  It  has  also  been  considered  whether 
laymen  who  have  fallen  under  the  same  compulsion  may  be  admitted  to  orders,  and  we 
have  decreed  that,  since  they  have  in  no  respect  been  guilty,  they  may  be  ordained; 
provided  their  past  course  of  life  be  found  to  have  been  upright. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  III. 
TJwse  who  have  been  subjected  to  torments 
and  have  suffered  violence,  and  have  eaten  food 
offered  to  idols  after  being  tyrannized  over,  shall 
not  be  deprived  of  communion.  And  laymen 
who  have  endured  the  same  sufferings,  since 
they  have  in  no  way  transgressed,  if  they  ivish 
to  be  ordained,  they  may  be,  if  otherwise  they  be 
blameless. 

In  the  translation  the  word  "  abused "  is 
given  as  the  equivalent  of  ■n-epia-^ia-SivTa'i, 
which  Zonaras  translated,  "if  their  clothes 
have  been  torn  from  their  bodies,"  and  this  is 
quite  accurate  if  the  reading  is  correct,  but 


Routh  has  foundin  the  Bodleian  several  MSS. 
which  had  irepio-xe^eVras.  Hefele  adopts  this 
reading  and  translates  "  declaring  themselves 
to  be  Christians  but  who  have  subsequently 
been  vanquished,  whether  their  oppressors 
have  by  force  put  incense  into  their  hands  or 
have  compelled  them,  etc."  Hammond  trans- 
lates "and  have  been  harassed  by  their  per- 
secutors forcibly  putting  something  into  their 
hands  or  who  have  been  compelled,  etc."  The 
phrase  is  obscure  at  best  with  either  reading. 

This  canon  is  in  the  Corpus  Juris  Canonici 
united  to  the  two  previous  canons,  Dccretum, 
Pars  I.,  Dist.  1.,  c.  xxxii. 


CANON  IV. 


Concerning  those  who  have  been  forced  to  sacrifice,  and  who,  in  addition,  have  par- 
taken of  feasts  in  honour  of  the  idols  ;  as  many  as  were  haled  away,  but  afterwards 
went  up  with  a  cheerful  countenance,  and  wore  their  costliest  apparel,  and  partook  with 
indifference  of  the  feast  provided ;  it  is  decreed  that  all  such  be  hearers  for  one  year, 
and  prostrators  for  three  years,  and  that  they  communicate  in  prayers  only  for  two  years, 
and  then  return  to  full  communion. 


ANCYKA.     A.D.  314. 


Go 


NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  IV. 
Such  as  have  been  led  away  and  have  with  joy 
gone  up  and  eaten  are  to  be  in  subjection  for  six 
years. 

In  the  Greek  the  word  for  "  full  commun- 
ion" is  to  re'Aetov  ("the  perfection"),   an    ex- 


denote  the  Holy  Communion.      Vide  Suicer, 
Thesaurus  ad  h.  v. 

Bingham. 
[The   Holy  Communion   was  so   called   as 
being]  that  sacred  mystery  which  unites  us  to 
Christ,  and  gives  us  the  most  consummate  per- 


pression  frequently  used  by  early  writers  to  !  fection  that  we  are  capable  of  in  this  world. 


CANON  V. 

As  many,  however,  as  went  up  in  mourning  attire  and  sat  down  and  ate,  weeping 
throughout  the  whole  entertainment,  if  they  have  fulfilled  the  three  years  as  prostrators, 
let  them  be  received  without  oblation  ;  and  if  they  did  not  eat,  let  them  be  prostrators 
two  years,  and  in  the  third  year  let  them  communicate  without  oblation,  so  that  in  the 
fourth  year  they  may  be  received  into  full  communion.  But  the  bishops  have  the  right, 
after  considering  the  character  of  their  conversion,  either  to  deal  with  them  more  leni- 
ently, or  to  extend  the  time.  But,  first  of  all,  let  their  life  before  and  since  be  thor- 
oughly examined,  and  let  the  indulgence  be  determined  accordingly. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  V. 
Tliose  ivho  have  gone  up  in  mourning  weeds, 
and  have  ecden  with  tears,  shall  be  prostrators 
for  three  years ;  but  if  they  have  not  eaten,  then 
for  two  years.  And  according  to  their  former 
and  after  life,  whether  good  or  evil,  they  shall 
find  the  bishop  gentle  or  severe. 

Herbst  and  Kouth  have  been  followed  by 
many  in  supposing  that  "  oblation  "  (-n-poa-^opd) 
in  this  canon  refers  to  the  sacrament  of  the 
altar.  But  this  seems  to  be  a  mistake,  as  the 
word  while  often  used  to  denote  the  whole 
act  of  the  celebration  of  the  Holy  Eucharist, 


is  not  used  to  mean  the  receiving  alone  of  that 
sacrament. 

Suicer  (Thesaurus  s.  v.  -n-pocrtpopa)  translates 
"  They  may  take  part  in  divine  worship,  but 
not  actively,"  that  is,  "  they  may  not  mingle 
their  offerings  with  those  of  the  faithful." 

Hefele. 
But  as  tliose  who  cannot  present  their  offer- 
ings during  the  sacrifice  are  excluded  from 
the  communion,  the  complete  meaning  of  the 
canon  is  :  <:  They  may  be  present  at  divine 
service,  but  may  neither  offer  nor  communi- 
cate with  the  faithful." 


CANON  VI. 

Concerning  those  who  have  yielded  merely  upon  threat  of  penalties  and  of  the  con- 
fiscation of  their  goods,  or  of  banishment,  and  have  sacrificed,  and  who  till  this  present 
time  have  not  repented  nor  been  converted,  but  who  now,  at  the  time  of  this  synod,  have 
approached  with  a  purpose  of  conversion,  it  is  decreed  that  they  be  received  as  hearers 
till  the  Great  Day,  and  that  after  the  Great  Day  they  be  prostrators  for  three  years, 
and  for  two  3-ears  more  communicate  without  oblation,  and  then  come  to  full  commun- 
ion, so  as  to  complete  the  period  of  six  full  years.  And  if  any  have  been  admitted  to 
penance  before  this  synod,  let  the  beginning  of  the  six  years  be  reckoned  to  them  from 
that  time.  Nevertheless,  if  there  should  be  any  danger  or  prospect  of  death  whether 
from  disease  or  any  other  cause,  let  them  be  received,  but  under  limitation. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VI. 
A  man  who  yielded  to  threats  alone,  and  has 
sacrificed,  and  then  repented  let  him  for  five 
years  be  a  prostrator. 

VOL.    XIV. 


Zonaeas. 
But   should   any  of  those   debarred  from 
coxumunion  as  penitents  be  seized  with  illness 
or  in   any  other  way  be  brought  nigh   to 


66 


ANCYRA.    A.D.  314 


death,  they  may  be  received  to  communion  ; 
but  in  accordance  with  this  law  or  distinc- 
tion, that  if  they  escape  death  and  recover 
their  health,  they  shall  be  altogether  deprived 
again  of  communion  until  they  have  finished 
their  six  years  penance. 

Hammond. 
"  The  Great  Day,"  that  is,  Easter  Day.   The 


great  reverence  which  the  Primitive  Church 
from  the  earliest  ages  felt  for  the  holy  festi- 
val of  Easter  is  manifested  by  the  application 
of  the  epithet  Great,  to  everything  connected 
with  it.  The  preceding  Friday,  i.e.,  Good 
Friday,  was  called  the  Great  Preparation,  the 
Saturday,  the  Great  Sabbath,  and  the  whole 
week,  the  Great  Week. 


CANON  VII. 

Concerning  those  who  have  partaken  at  a  heathen  feast  in  a  place  appointed  for 
heathens,  but  who  have  brought  and  eaten  their  own  meats,  it  is  decreed  that  they  be 
received  after  they  have  been  prostrators  two  years  ;  but  whether  with  oblation,  every 
bishop  must  determine  after  he  has  made  examination  into  the  rest  of  their  life. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VII. 
If  anyone  having  his  own  food,  shall  eat  it 
with  heathen  at  their  feasts,  let  him  be  a  ])ros- 
t  rat  or  for  two  years. 

Hefele. 
Several  Christians  tried  with  worldly  pru- 
dence, to  take  a  middle  course.  On  the  one 
hand,  hoping  to  escape  persecution,  they  were 
present  at  the  feasts  of  the  heathen  sacrifices, 
which  were  held  in  the  buildings  adjoining 
the  temples ;  and  on  the  other,  in  order  to 
appease  their  consciences,  they  took  their  own 
food,  and  touched  nothing  that  had  been  of- 
fered to  the  gods.  These  Christians  forgot 
that  St.  Paul  had  ordered  that  meats  sacrificed 
to  the  gods  should  be  avoided,  not  because 


they  were  tainted  in  themselves,  as  the  idols 
were  nothing,  but  from  another,  and  in  fact  a 
twofold  reason  :  1st,  Because,  in  partaking 
of  them,  some  had  still  the  idols  in  their 
hearts,  that  is  to  say,  were  still  attached  to 
the  worship  of  idols,  and  thereby  sinned  ;  and 
2dly,  Because  others  scandalized  their  breth- 
ren, and  sinned  in  that  way.  To  these  two 
reasons  a  third  may  be  added,  namely,  the 
hypocrisy  and  the  duplicity  of  those  Chris- 
tians who  wished  to  appear  heathens,  and 
nevertheless  to  remain  Christians.  The  Synod 
punished  them  with  two  years  of  penance  in 
the  third  degree,  and  gave  to  each  bishop  the 
right,  at  the  expiration  of  this  time,  either  to 
admit  them  to  communion,  or  to  make  them 
remain  some  time  longer  in  the  fourth  degree. 


CANON  VIII. 

Let  those  who  have  twice  or  thrice  sacrificed  under  compulsion,  be  prostrators  four 
years,  and  communicate  without  oblation  two  years,  and  the  seventh  year  they  shall  be 
received  to  full  communion. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VIII. 
Whoever  has   sacrificed   a  second   or 


i  ances  ought  to  be  imposed  for  the  frequent 
third  commission  of  the   same   crime,  and  conse- 


time,  bid  has  been  led  thereto  by  force,  shall  be  a 
prostrator  for  seven  years. 

Van  Espen. 
This  canon  shews  how  in  the  Church   it 
was  a  received   principle  that  greater   pen- 


quently  it  was  then  believed  that  the  number 
of  times  the  sin  had  been  committed  should 
be  expressed  in  confession,  that  the  penance 
might  correspond  to  the  sin,  greater  or  less 
as  the  case  may  be,  and  the  time  of  probation 
be  accordingly  protracted  or  remitted. 


CANON  IX. 

As  many  as  have  not  merely  apostatized,  but  have  risen  against  their  brethren  and 
forced  them  [to  apostatize],  and  have  been  guilty  of  their  being  forced,  let  these  for 
three  years  take  the  place  of  hearers,  and  for  another  term  of  six  years  that  of  prostra- 


ANCYRA.     A.D.  314 


67 


tors,  and  for  another  year  let  them  communicate  without  oblation,  in  order  that,  when 
they  have  fulfilled  the  space  of  ten  years,  they  may  partake  of  the  communion ;  but 
during  this  time  the  rest  of  their  life  must  also  be  enquired  into. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  IX. 

Whoever  has  not  only  sacrificed  voluntarily 
but  also  has  forced  another  to  sacrifice,  shall 
be  a  prostrator  for  ten  years. 

[It  will  be  noticed  that  this  epitome  does 
not  agree  with  the  canon,  although  Aristenus 
does  not  note  the  discrepancy.] 

Van  Espen. 
From  this  canon  we  are  taught  that  the 


circumstances  of  the  sin  that  has  been  com- 
mitted are  to  be  taken  into  account  in  assign-* 
ing  the  penance. 

Aristenus. 
When  the  ten  years  are  past,  he  is  worthy 
of  perfection,  and  fit  to  receive  the  divine 
sacraments.  Unless  perchance  an  examina- 
tion of  the  rest  of  his  life  demands  his  excite 
sion  from  the  divine  communion. 


CANON  X. 

They  who  have  been  made  deacons,  declaring  when  they  were  ordained  that  they 
must  marry,  because  they  were  not  able  to  abide  so,  and  who  afterwards  have  married, 
shall  continue  in  their  ministry,  because  it  was  conceded  to  them  by  the  bishop.  But 
if  any  were  silent  on  this  matter,  undertaking  at  their  ordination  to  abide  as  they  were, 
and  afterwards  proceeded  to  marriage,  these  shall  cease  from  the  diaconate. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  X. 


Wlwso  is  to  be  ordained  deacon,  if  he  has 
before  announced  to  the  bishoj)  that  he  cannot 
persevere  unmarried,  let  him  marry  and  let  him 
be  a  deacon  ;  but  if  he  shall  have  kept  silence, 
should  he  take  a  wife  afterwards  let  him  be  cast 
out. 

Van  Espen. 

The  case  proposed  to  the  synod  and  de- 
cided in  this  canon  was  as  follows :  When  the 
bishop  was  willing  to  ordain  two  to  the 
diaconate,  one  of  them  declared  that  he  did 
not  intend  to  bind  himself  to  preserving  per- 
petual continence,  but  intended  to  get  mar- 
ried, because  he  had  not  the  power  to  remain 
continent.  The  other  said  nothing.  The 
bishop  laid  his  hands  on  each  and  conferred 
the  diaconate. 

After  the  ordination  it  fell  out  that  both 
got  married,  the  question  propounded  is, 
What  must  be  done  in  each  case?  The 
synod  ruled  that  he  who  had  made  protesta- 
tion at  his  ordination  should  remain  in 
his  ministry,  "  because  of  the  license  of  the 
bishop,"  that  is  that  he  might  contract  matri- 
mony after  the  reception  of  the  diaconate. 
With   regard  to    him  who  kept  silence  the 


synod  declares  that  he  should  cease  from  his 
ministry. 

The  resolution  of  the  synod  to  the  first 
question  shews  that  there  was  a  general  law 
which  bound  the  deacons  to  continence  ;  but 
this  synod  judged  it  meet  that  the  bishops 
for  just  cause  might  dispense  with  this  law, 
and  this  license  or  dispensation  was  deemed 
to  have  been  given  by  the  bishop  if  he 
ordained  him  after  his  protestation  at  the 
time  of  his  ordination  that  he  intended  to  be 
married,  because  he  coidd  not  remain  as  he 
was  ;  giving  by  the  act  of  ordination  his  tacit 
approbation.  Moreover  from  this  decision  it 
is  also  evident  that  not  only  was  the  or- 
dained deacon  allowed  to  enter  but  also  to 
use  matrimony  after  his  ordination.  .  . 
Moreover  the  deacon  who  after  this  pro- 
testation entered  and  used  matrimony,  not 
only  remained  a  deacon,  but  continued  in  the 
exercise  of  his  ministry. 

On  the  whole  subject  of  Clerical  Celibacy 
in  the  Early  Church  see  the  Excursus  de- 
voted to  that  matter. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici.  Decretum  Pars  I.,  Dist.  xxviii,  c. 
viii. 


F  3 


GS 


ANCYRA.    A.D.  314 


CANON  XI. 

It  is  decreed  that  virgins  'who- have  been  betrothed,  and  who  have  afterwards  been 
carried  off  by  others,  shall  be  restored  to  those  to  whom  they  had  formerly  been  be- 
trothed, even  though  they  may  have  suffered  violence  from  the  ravisher. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XI. 


If  a  young  girl  who  is  engaged  be  stolen  away 
by  force  by  another  man,  let  her  be  restored  to 
the  former. 

Hefele. 
This  canon  treats  only  of  betrothed  women 
(of  the  sponsalia  dc  futuro)  not  of  those  who 
are  married  (of  the  sponsalia  de  prcesenti). 
In  the  case  of  the  latter  there  could  be  no 
doubt  as  to  the  duty  of  restitution.   The  man 


who  was  betrothed  was,  moreover,  at  liberty 
to  receive  his  affianced  bride  who  had  been 
carried  off  or  not. 

Johnson. 
Here  Balsarnon  puts  in  a  very  proper  cave, 
viz.:  If  he  to  whom  she  was  espoused  demand 
her  to  be  his  wife. 

Compare  St.  Basil's  twenty-second  canon 
in  his  letter  to  Amphilochius,  where  it  is  so 
ruled, 


CANON  XII. 

It  is  decreed  that  they  who  have  offered  sacrifice  before  their  baptism,  and  were 
afterwards  baptized,  may  be  promoted  to  orders,  inasmuch  as  they  have  been  cleansed, 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XII. 

Whoso  has  sacrificed  before  his  baptism,  after 
it  shall  be  guiltless. 

Hefele. 

This  canon  does  not  speak  generally  of  all 

those  who  sacrificed  before  baptism  ;  for  if  a 

heathen   sacrificed  before   having  embraced 

Christianity,  he   certainly  could   not  be  re- 


proached for  it  after  his  admission.  It  was 
quite  a  different  case  with  a  catechumen,  who 
had  already  declared  for  Christianity,  but 
who,  during  the  persecution  had  lost  courage, 
and  sacrificed.  In  this  case  it  might  be  asked 
whether  he  could  still  be  admitted  to  the 
priesthood.  The  Council  decided  that  a  bap- 
tized catechumen  could  afterwards  be  pro- 
moted to  holy  orders. 


CANON  XIII. 

It  is  not  lawful  for  Chorepiscopi  to  ordain  presbyters  or  deacons,  and  most  assuredly 
not  presbyters  of  a  city,  without  the  commission  of  the  bishop  given  in  writing,  in  another 
parish. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XIII. 
A  chorepiscopus  is  not  to  ordain  ivithout  the 
consent  of  the  bishop. 

Hefele. 
If  the  first  part  of  the  thirteenth  canon  is 
easy  to  understand,  the  second,  on  the  con- 
trary, presents  a  great  difficulty ;  for  a  priest 
of  a  town  could  not  in  any  case  have  the 
power  of  consecrating  priests  and  deacons, 
least  of  all  in  a  strange  diocese.  Many  of  the 
most  learned  men  have,  for  this  reason,  sup- 


posed that  the  Creek  text  of  the  second  half 
of  the  canon,  as  we  have  read  it,  is  incorrect 
or  defective.  It  wants,  say  they,  iroieiv  n,  or 
ediquid  agerc,  i.e.,  to  complete  a  religious  function. 
To  confirm  this  supposition,  they  have  ap- 
pealed to  several  ancient  versions,  especially 
to  that  of  Isidore  :  seel  nee  presbyteris  civitatis 
sine  episcopi prcecepto  ampliuS  ediquid  impereire, 
vel  sine  auctoritate  literarum  ejus  in  unaquaque 
(some  read  iv  eKaorr?  instead  of  iv  erepa)  petro- 
chia  aliquid  agere.  The  ancient  Roman  MS. 
of  the  canons,  Codex  Canonum,  has  the  same 


ANCYEA.     A.D.  311- 


69 


reading,  only  that  it  lias  provincia  instead  of 
parochia.  Fulgentius  Ferrandus,  deacon  of 
Carthage,  who  long  ago  made  a  collection  of 
canons,  translates  in  the  same  way  in  his  Brc- 
viatio  Canonum :  Tit  prcsbyteri  civitatis  sine 
jussu  episcopi  nihil  jubeant,  nee  in  unaquaque 
parochia  aliquid  agant.  Van  Espen  has  ex- 
plained this  canon  in  the  same  way. 

Routh  has  given  another  interpretation. 
He  maintained  that  there  was  not  a  word 
missing  in  this  canon,  but  that  at  the  com- 
mencement one  ought  to  read,  according  to 
several  MSS.  xco/3€7n.<7K6Vois  in  the  dative,  and 
further  down  dXXa  firjv  //.^Se  instead  of  aXXa 
fxr]Sk  then  TrpeafivTipovs  (in  the  accusative)  7roAeo)s 
and  finally  eKaor»7  instead  of  eripa,  and  that  we 


must  therefore  translate,  "  Chorepiscopi  are 
not  permitted  to  consecrate  priests  and  dea- 
cons (for  the  country)  still  less  (dAAa  fxrjv  ^8e) 
can  they  consecrate  priests  for  the  town  with- 
out the  consent  of  the  bishop  of  the  place." 
The  Greek  text,  thus  modified  according  to 
some  MSS.,  especially  those  in  the  Bodleian 
Library,  certainly  gives  a  good  meaning.  Still 
a\Xa  [xrjv  fi-qSe  does  not  mean,  but  still  less :  it 
means,  but  certainly  not,  which  makes  a  con- 
siderable difference. 

Besides  this,  it  can  very  seldom  have  hap- 
pened that  the  chorepiscopi  ordained  presby- 
ters or  deacons  for  a  town  ;  and  if  so,  they 
were  already  forbidden,  at  least  implicitly, 
in  the  first  part  of  the  canon. 


CANON  XIV. 

It  is  decreed  that  among  the  clergy,  presbyters  and  deacons  who  abstain  from  flesh 
shall  taste  of  it,  and  afterwards,  if  they  shall  so  please,  may  abstain.  But  if  they  dis- 
dain it,  and  will  not  even  eat  herbs  served  with  flesh,  but  disobey  the  canon,  let  them 
be  removed  from  their  order. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XIV. 


A  priest  who  is  an  abstainer  from  flesh,  let 
him  merely  taste  it  and  so  let  him  abstain.  But 
if  he  will  not  taste  even  the  vegetables  cooked 
with  the  meat  let  him  be  deposed  (ireiravcrtiw). 

There  is  a  serious  dispute  about  the  read- 
ing of  the  Creek  text.  I  have  followed  Bouth, 
who,  relying  on  three  MSS.  the  Collect  io  of 
John  of  Antioch  and  the  Latin  versions,  reads 
el  Se  /SSeXvVcroij'To  instead  of  the  «'  ok  /3ov\owto 


of  the  ordinary  text,  which  as  Bp.  Beveridge 
had  pointed  out  before  has  no  meaning  unless 
a  iJLT]  be  introduced. 

Zonaras  points  out  that  the  canon  chiefly 
refers  to  the  Love  feasts. 

I  cannot  agree  with  Hefele  in  his  transla- 
tion of  the  last  clause.  He  makes  the  refer- 
ence to  "this  present  canon,"  I  think  it- is 
clearly  to  the  53  (52)  of  the  so-called  Canons 
of  the  Apostles,  tw  kwovl  "  the  well-known 
canon." 


CANON  XV. 

CONCERNING  things  belonging  to  the  church,  which  presbyters  may  have  sold  when 
there  was  no  bishop,  it  is  decreed  that  the  Church  property  shall  be  reclaimed ;  and  it 
shall  be  in  the  discretion  of  the  bishop  whether  it  is  better  to  receive  the  purchase  price, 
or  not ;  for  oftentimes  the  revenue  of  the  things  sold  might  yield  them  the  greater  value. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XV. 


Sales  of  Church  goods  made  by  presbyters  are 
null,  and  the  matter  shall  rest  with  the  bishop. 

Hefele. 
If  the  purchaser  of  ecclesiastical  properties 
has  realized  more  by  the  temporary  revenue 
of  such  properties  than  the  price  of  the  pur- 
chase, the  Synod  thinks  there  is  no  occasion 
to  restore  him  this  price,  as  he  has  already 


received  a  sufficient  indemnity  from  the 
revenue,  and  as,  according  to  the  rules  then 
in  force,  interest  drawn  from  the  purchase 
money  was  not  permitted.  Besides,  the  pur- 
chaser had  done  wrong  in  buying  ecclesiasti- 
cal property  during  the  vacancy  of  a  see  (sede 
vacante).  Beveridge  and  Routh  have  shown 
that  ill  the  text  dvaKaXdcrSai  and  TrpoaoSoj' 
must  be  read.1 

1  a.vaKn\ii<r9o.v  for  avaf3a\si<r0ai  and  npoaoSov  for  ei^oSov. 


?0 


ANGYBA.     A.D.  314 


CANON    XVI. 

Let  those  who  have  been  or  who  are  guilty  of  bestial  lusts,  if  they  have  sinned 
while  under  twenty  years  of  age,  be  prostrators  fifteen  years,  and  afterwards  communi- 
cate in  prayers  ;  then,  having  passed  five  years  in  this  communion,  let  them  have  a 
share  in  the  oblation.  But  let  their  life  as  prostrators  be  examined,  and  so  let  them 
receive  indulgence ;  and  if  any  have  been  insatiable  in  their  crimes,  then  let  their  time 
of  prostration  be  prolonged.  And  if  any  who  have  passed  this  age  and  had  wives,  have 
fallen  into  this  sin,  let  them  be  prostrators  twenty-five  years,  and  then  communicate  in 
prayers ;  and,  after  they  have  been  five  years  in  the  communion  of  prayers,  let  them 
share  the  oblation.  And  if  any  married  men  of  more  than  fifty  years  of  age  have  so 
sinned,  let  them  be  admitted  to  communion  only  at  the  point  of  death. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XVI. 
Whoever  shall  have  commerce  with  animals 
devoid  of  reason  being  younger  than  twenty, 
shall  be  a  prostrator  for  fifteen  years.  If  he  is 
over  that  age  and  has  a  wife  ivhcn  he  falls  into 
this  wickedness  he  shall  be  a  prostrator  for 
twenty-five  years.  But  the  married  man  ivho 
shall  do  so  ivhen  over  fifty  years  of  age,  shall  be 
a  prostrator  to  his  life's  end. 

It  is  interesting  to  compare  with  this,  as 
Van  Espen  does,  the  canon  of  the  Church  of 


j  England  set  forth  in  the  tenth  century  under 
King  Edgar,  where,  Part  II.,  canon  xvi.,  we 
read — 

"  If  any  one  twenty  years  of  age  shall  de- 
file himself  with  a  beast,  or  shall  commit 
sodomy  let  him  fast  fifteen  years  ;  and  if  he 
have  a  wife  and  be  forty  years  of  age,  and 
shall  do  such  a  deed  let  him  abstain  now  and 
fast  all  the  rest  of  his  life,  neither  shall  he 
presume  until  he  is  dying  to  receive  the  Lord's 
body.  Youths  and  fools  who  shall  do  any 
such  thing  shall  be  soundly  trounced." 


CANON  XVII. 

Defilers  of  themselves  with  beasts,  being  also  leprous,  who  have  infected  others 
[with  the  leprosy  oi  this  crime],  the  holy  Synod  commands  to  pray  among  the  hie- 
mantes. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XVII. 


A  leper  who  goes  in  to  a  beast  or  even  to 
leprous  women,  shall  pray  with  the  hybernantes. 

AcirpwcravTa?  is  from  \eirp6u>  not  from  Xenpau) 
and  therefore  cannot  mean  "  have  been 
lepers,"  but  "have  made  others  rough  and 
scabby."  It  is  only  in  the  passive  and  in 
Alexandrian  Greek  that  it  has  the  mean- 
ing to  become  leprous.  Vide  Liddell  and 
Scott. 

There  seems  but  little  doubt  that  the  word 
is  to  be  understood  spiritually  as  suggested 
above. 

The  last  word  of  the  canon  is  also  a  source 
of  confusion.  Both  Beveridge  and  Bouth 
understand  by  the  x^^f-^01  those  possessed 
with  devils.  Suicer  however  (Thesaurus) 
thinks  that  the  penitents  of  the  lowest  degree 
are  intended,  who  had  no  right  to  enter  the 


church,  but  were  exposed  in  the  open  porch 
to  the  inclemencies  (x€LlJLl"v)  °f  the  weather. 
But,  after  all  it  matters  little,  as  the  possessed 
also  were  forced  to  remain  in  the  same  place, 
and  shared  the  same  name. 

Besides  the  grammatical  reason  for  the 
meauing  of  XeTrpwo-avras  given  above  there  is 
another  argument  of  Hefele's,  as  follows  : 

Hefele. 
It  is  clear  that  \e-pwo-avTas  cannot  possibly 
mean  "  those  who  have  been  lepers "  ;  for 
there  is  no  reason  to  be  seen  why  those  who 
were  cured  of  that  malady  should  have  to  re- 
main outside  the  church  among  the  flentes. 
Secondly,  it  is  clear  that  the  words  AeTrpous 
oVra?,  etc.  are  added  to  give  force  to  the  ex- 
pression aXoyevo-djxevoi.  The  preceding  canon 
had  decreed  different  penalties  for  different 
kinds  of  dXoyevcrdp.ivoi.  But  that  pronounced 
by  canon  xvii.  being  much  severer  than  the 


ANCYEA.     A.D.  314 


71 


preceding  ones,  the  dXoyetW/xaoi  of  this 
canon  must  be  greater  sinners  than  those  of 
the  former  one.  This  greater  guilt  cannot 
consist  in  the  fact  of  a  literal  leprosy ;  for 
this  malady  was  not  a  consequence  of  besti- 
ality.     But  their  sin  was  evidently  greater 


when  they  tempted  others  to  commit  it.  It 
is  therefore  AeVpa  in  the  figurative  sense  that 
we  are  to  understand,  and  our  canon  thus 
means  ;  "  Those  who  were  spiritually  leprous 
through  this  sin,  and  tempting  others  to 
commit  it  made  them  leprous." 


CANON  XVIII. 

If  any  who  have  been  constituted  bishops,  but  have  not  been  received  by  the  parish 
to  which  they  were  designated,  shall  invade  other  parishes  and  wrong  the  constituted 
[bishops]  there,  stirring  up  seditions  against  them,  let  such  persons  be  suspended  from 
office  and  communion.  But  if  they  are  willing  to  accept  a  seat  among  the  presbyterate, 
where  they  formerly  were  presbyters,  let  them  not  be  deprived  of  that  honour.  But  if 
they  shall  act  seditiously  against  the  bishops  established  there,  the  honour  of  the  pres- 
byterate also  shall  be  taken  from  them  and  themselves  expelled. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  oe  Canon  XVIII. 


If  a  bishop  ivho  has  been  duly  constituted,  is 
not  received  by  the  Church  to  which  he  was 
elected,  but  gives  trouble  to  other  bishops,  let 
him  be  excommunicated. 

If  he  wishes  to  be  numbered  among  the  pres- 
byters, let  him  be  so  numbered.  But  if  he  shall 
be  at  outs  with  the  bishops  duly  constituted 


there,  let  him  be  deprived  of  the  honour  of  being 
even  a  presbyter. 

The  word  I  have  translated  "  suspended 
from  office  and  communion  "  is  d<£opi£eo-#ai. 
Suicer  in  his  Thesaurus  shews  that  this  word 
does  not  mean  only,  as  some  have  supposed, 
a  deprivation  of  office  and  dignity  (e.g.,  Van 
Espen),  but  also  an  exclusion  from  the  com- 
munion of  the  Church. 


CANON  XIX. 

If  any  persons  who  profess  virginity  shall  disregard  their  profession,  let  them  fulfil 
the  term  of  digamists.  And,  moreover,  we  prohibit  women  who  are  virgins  from  living 
with  men  as  sisters. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XIX. 

Whoever  has  professed  virginity  and  after- 
wards annuls  it,  let  him  be  cut  of  for  four 
years.  And  virgins  shall  not  go l  to  any  as 
to  brothers. 

Hammond. 

According  to  some  of  the  ancient  canons 
digamists  were  to  be  suspended  from  com- 
munion for  one  or  two  years,  though  Beve- 
ridge  and  others  doubt  whether  the  rule  was 
not  meant  to  apply  to  such  marriages  only  as 
were  contracted  before  a  former  one  was  dis- 
solved. Bingham  thinks  that  it  was  intended 
to  discountenance  marrying  after  an  unlawful 
divorce.     (Ant,  Bk.  xv,  c.  iv.,  §  18.)3 


1  Aristenus  understands  this  to  mean  to  "  live  with,"  using  the 

Verb  <TVl>ava<TTp4<t)€<T9a.l. 

a  This  view  of  Bingham's  would  seem  to  be  untenable,  since 


Hefele. 
The  first  part  of  this  canon  regards  all 
young  persons — men  as  well  as  women — who 
have  taken  a  vow  of  virginity,  and  who,  hav- 
ing thus,  so  to  speak,  betrothed  themselves 
to  God  are  guilty  of  a  quasi  digamy  in  violat- 
ing that  promise.  They  must  therefore  incur 
the  punishment  of  digamy  (successiva)  which, 
according  to  St.  Basil  the  Great,  consisted  of 
one  year's  seclusion. 

This  canon  is  found  in  Gratian's  Decrelum 
(P.  II.,  Causa  xxvii.,  Q.  i.,  c.  xxiv.)  as  follows  : 
"As  many  as  have  professed  virginity  and 
have  broken  their  vow  and  contemned  their 
profession  shall  be  treated  as  digamists,  that 
is  as  those  who  have  contracted  a  second  mar- 
riage. " 

the  penance  would  have  been  for  adultery  not  for  digamy  had 
the  former  marriage  still  been  in  force. 


n  ANCYRA.     A.D.  314. 


EXCUESUS  ON  SECOND  MARRIAGES,   CALLED  DIGAMY. 

To  distinguish  contemporaneous  from  successive  bigamy  I  shall  itse  throughout  this  vol- 
ume the  word.  "  digamy  "  to  denote  the  latter,  and  shall  thus  avoid  much  confusion  which 
otherwise  is  unavoidable. 

The  whole  subject  of  second,  and  even  of  third  and  fourth  marriages  has  a  great  interest 
for  the  student  of  early  ecclesiastical  legislation,  and  I  shall  therefore  treat  the  matter  here 
(as  I  shall  hope)  sufficiently  and  refer  the  reader  for  its  fuller  treatment  to  boohs  more  espe- 
cially upon  the  subject. 

The  general  position  of  the  Church  seems  to  have  been  to  discourage  all  second  mar- 
riages, and  to  point  to  a  single  matrimonial  connexion  as  the  more  excellent  way.  But  at 
the  same  time  the  principle  that  the  marriage  obligation  is  severed  by  death  was  universally 
recognised,  and  however  much  such  fresh  marriages  may  have  been  disapproved  of,  such 
disapproval  did  not  rest  upon  any  supposed  adulterous  character  in  the  new  connexion.  I 
cite  a  portion  of  an  admirable  article  upon  the  subject  by  an  English  barrister  of  Lincoln's 
Inn. 

(J.  M.  Ludlow,  in  Smith  and  Cheetham,  Dictionary  of  Christian  Antiquities,  sub  voce 
Digamy.) 

Although  among  the  earlier  Romans  1  there  was  one  form  of  marriage  which  was  indis- 
soluble, viz.,  that  by  confarreatio,  still  generally  a  second  marriage  either  after  death  or 
divorce  was  by  no  means  viewed  with  disfavour.  .  .  .  Meanwhile  an  intensifying  spirit  of 
asceticism  was  leading  many  in  the  Church  to  a  condemnation  of  second  marriage  in  all 
cases.  Minucius  Felix  (Octavius,  c.  31,  §  5)  only  professes  on  behalf  of  the  Christians  a 
preference  for  monogamy.  Clement  of  Alexandria  (a.d.  150-220)  seems  to  confine  the  term 
marriage  to  the  first  lawful  union  (Stromata,  Bk.  ii.).  ...  It  would  seem,  however,  that 
when  these  views  were  carried  to  the  extent  of  absolute  prohibition  of  second  marriages 
generally  by  several  heretical  sects,  the  Montanists  (see  Augustine,  Be  Rceresibus,  c.  xxvi.), 
the  Cathari  (ib.,  c.  xxxviii.),  and  a  portion  at  least  of  the  Novatianists  (see  Cotel.,  Patr.  Apoh, 
vol.  i.,  p.  91,  n.  16)  the  Church  saw  the  necessity  of  not  fixing  such  a  yoke  on  the  necks  of 
the  laity.  The  forbiddance  of  second  marriage,  or  its  assimilation  to  fornication,  was  treated 
as  one  of  the  marks  of  heresy  (Augustin.  u.  s.  ;  and  see  also  his  De  Bono  Vid.,  c.  vi.).  The 
sentiment  of  Augustine  (in  the  last  referred  to  passage)  may  be  taken  to  express  the 
Church's  judgment  at  the  close  of  the  fourth  century  :  "  Second  marriages  are  not  to  be 
condemned,  but  had  in  less  honour,"  and  see  also  Epiphanius,  in  his  Exposition  of  the  Catho- 
lic Faith. 

To  these  remarks  of  Mr.  Ludlow's,  I  may  add  that  St.  Ambrose  had  written  (Be  Jlduis,  c. 
xi.),  "  We  do  not  prohibit  second  marriages,  but  we  do  not  approve  marriages  frequently 
reiterated."  St.  Jerome  had  spoken  still  more  strongly  (Ep.  lxvii.,  Apol.  pro  libris  adv. 
Jovin.),  "I  do  not  condemn  digamists,  or  even  trigamists  or,  if  such  a  thing  can  be  said, 
octagamists."  It  does  not  seem  that  the  penance  which  was  imposed  in  the  East  upon  those 
entering  into  second  nuptials  was  imposed  in  the  West.  The  Corpus  Juris  Canonici  contains 
two  decretals,  one  of  Alexander  III.  and  another  of  Urban  III.,  forbidding  priests  to  give  the 
nuptial  benediction  in  cases  of  reiterated  marriage.     In  the  East  at  second  marriages  the 

1  The  reader  may  recall  the  words  of  Dido :  Ille  meos,  primusqui  rue  slbi  juuxit,  atnores 

Abstulit ;  ille  habeat  secum  servetque  sepulcro. 


ANCYRA.    A.D.  314 


Td 


benediction  of  the  crown  is  omitted  and  "  propitiatory  prayers  "  are  to  be  said.  Mr.  Lud- 
low points  out  that  in  the  "Sanctions  and  Decrees,"  falsely  attributed  to  the  Council  of 
Nice  and  found  in  Man  si  (vol.  ii.,  col.  1029)  it  is  expressly  stated  that  widowers  and  widows 
may  marry,  but  that  "  the  blessing  of  the  crowns  is  not  to  be  imparted  to  them,  for  this  is 
only  once  given,  at  first  marriages,  and  is  not  to  be  repeated.  .  .  .  But  if  one  of  them 
be  not  a  widower  or  widow,  let  such  one  alone  receive  the  benediction  with  the  paranymphs, 
those  whom  he  will." 


CANON  XX. 


If  the  wife  of  anyone  has  committed  adultery  or  if  any  man  commit  adultery  it  seems 
fit  that  he  shall  be  restored  to  full  communion  after  seven  years  passed  in  the  prescribed 
degrees  [of  penance]. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XX. 


An  adulteress  and  an  adulterer  are  to  be  cut 
of  for  seven  years. 

Hefele. 

The  simplest  explanation  of  this  canon  is 
"that  the  man  or  woman  who  has  violated 
the  marriage  bond  shall  undergo  a  seven 
years'  penance";  but  many  reject  this  ex- 
planation, because  the  text  says  awov  tu'x«(v 
and  consequently  can  refer  only  to  the  hus- 
band. Fleury  and  Eouth  think  the  canon 
speaks,  as  does  the  seventieth  of  Elvira,  of  a 
woman  who  has  broken  the  marriage  tie  with 
the  knowledge  and  consent  of  her  husband. 
The  husband  would  therefore  in  this  case  be 
punished  for  this  permission,  just  as  if  he 
had  himself  committed  adultery.  Van  Espen 
has  given  another  explanation  :  "  That  he 
who  marries  a  woman  already  divorced  for 
adultery  is  as  criminal  as  if  he  had  himself 


committed  adultery."    But  this  explanation 
appears  to  us  more  forced  than  that  already 
given  ;   and  we  think  that  the  Greek  com- 
mentators Balsamon  and  Zonaras  were  right 
in   giving    the  explanation  we  have   offered 
first  as  the  most  natural.     They  think  that 
the  Synod  punished  every  adulterer,  whether 
|  man  or  woman,  by  a  seven  years'  penance. 
|  There   is  no  reason  for  making   a   mistake 
because   only  the  word  airbv  occurs  in  the 
;  passage  in  which  the  penalty  is  fixed ;    for 
clvtov  here  means  the  guilty  party,  and  applies 
!  equally  to  the  woman  and  the  man  :  besides, 
in  the   preceding   canon  the  masculine  ocrot 
!  i-n-ayyeXXo/jievoL  includes  young  men  and  young 
1  women  also.     It  is  probable  that  the  Trullan 
;  Synod  of  692,  in  forming  its  eighty-seventh 
I  canon,  had  in  view  the  twentieth  of  Ancyra. 
The  sixty-ninth  canon  of  Elvira  condemned  to 
a  lighter  punishment — only  five  years  of  pen- 
ance— him  who  had  been  only  once  guilty  of 
adultery. 


CANON  XXI. 

Concebning  women  who  commit  fornication,  and  destroy  that  which  they  have  con- 
ceived, or  who  are  employed  in  making  drugs  for  abortion,  a  former  decree  excluded 
them  until  the  hour  of  death,  aud  to  this  some  have  assented.  Nevertheless,  being 
desirous  to  use  somewhat  greater  lenity,  we  have  ordained  that  they  fulfil  ten  years  [of 
penance],  according  to  the  prescribed  degrees. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXI. 
Harlots  taking  injurious  medicines  are  to  be 
subjected  to  penance  for  ten  years. 

The  phrase   "and  to  this  some  have  as- 
sented "  is  the   translation  of  Hervetus,  Van 


suggests  to 


Espen,  and  Hefele.     Dr.  Routk 
understand  dt  and  translate,  "  the  same  pun- 
ishment will  be  inflicted  on  those  who  assist 
causing    miscarriages,"   but    this   seems 


m 


rather  an  unnatural  and  strained  rendering 
of  the  Greek. 


n 


ANCYKA.     A.D.  311 


CANON  XXII. 

Concerning  wilful  murderers  let  them  remain  prostrators ;  but  at  the  end  of  life  let 


them  be  indulged  with  full  communion. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXII. 

A  voluntary  homicide  may  at  the  last  attain 
perfection} 

Van  Espen. 

It  is  noteworthy  how  singularly  appositely 
[Constantine]  Harmenopulus  the  Scholiast  in 
the  Epitom.  Canonum.,  Sect,  v.,  tit.  3,  tells  the 
following  story  :  "  In  the  time  of  the  Patriarch 
Luke,  a  certain  bishop  gave  absolution  in 
writing  to  a  soldier  who  had  committed  vol- 
untary homicide,  after  a  very  short  time  of 


penace  ;  and  afterwards  when  he  was  accused 
before  the  synod  of  having  done  so,  he  de- 
fended himself  by  citing  the  canon  which 
gives  bishops  the  power  of  remitting  or  in- 
creasing the  length  of  their  penance  to  peni- 
tents. But  he  was  told  in  answer  that  this 
was  granted  indeed  to  pontiffs  but  not  that 
they  should  use  it  without  examination,  and 
with  too  great  lenity.  Wherefore  the  synod 
subjected  the  soldier  to  the  canonical  penance 
and  the  bishop  it  mulcted  for  a  certain  time, 
bidding  him  cease  from  the  exercise  of  his 
ministry." 


CANON  XXIII. 

Concerning  involuntary  homicides,  a  former  decree  directs  that  they  be  received  to 
full  communion  after  seven  years  [of  penance],  according  to  the  prescribed  degrees; 
but  this  second  one,  that  they  fulfil  a  term  of  five  years. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXIII. 
An  involuntary  homicide  shall  be  subjected 
to  penance  for  five  years. 

Van  Espen. 
Of  voluntary  and  involuntary  homicides  St. 
Basil  treats  at  length  in  his  Canonical  Epistle 
ad  Amphilochium,    can.    viii.,  lvi.   and  lvii., 


and  fixes  the  time  of  penance  at  twenty  years 
for  voluntary  and  ten  years  for  involuntary 
homicides.  It  is  evident  tbat  the  penance 
given  for  this  crime  varied  in  different 
churches,  although  it  is  clear  from  the  great 
length  of  the  penance,  how  enormous  the 
crime  was  considered,  no  light  or  short  pen- 
ance being  sufficient. 


CANON  XXIV. 

They  who  practice  divination,  and  follow  the  customs  of  the  heathen,  or  who  take 
men  to  their  houses  for  the  invention  of  sorceries,  or  for  lustrations,  fall  under  the  canon 
of  five  years'  [penance] ,  according  to  the  prescribed  degrees ;  that  is,  three  years  as 
prostrators,  and  two  of  prayer  without  oblation. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXIV. 
Whoso  uses  vaticination  and  whoso  introduces 
anyone  into  his  house  for  the  sake  of  making  a 
poison  or  a  lustration  let  him  be  subject  to  pen- 
ance for  five  years. 

I  read   £Svu>v  for  xpoi-w  and   accordingly 
translate  "  of  the  heathen." 

1  That  is,  receive  the  Sacraments. 


Van  Espen. 


It  is  greatly  to  be  desired  that  bishops  and 
pastors  to-day  would  take  example  from  the 
fathers  of  Ancyra  and  devote  their  attention 
strenuously  to  eliminate  superstition  from 
the  people,  and  would  expound  with  ani- 
mation to  the  people  the  enormity  of  this 
crime. 


ANCYKA.    A.D.  314 


75 


CANON  XXV. 

One  who  had  betrothed  a  maiden,  corrupted  her  sister,  so  that  she  conceived.  After 
that  he  married  his  betrothed,  but  she  who  had  been  corrupted  hanged  herself.  The 
parties  to  this  affair  were  ordered  to  be  received  among  the  co-standers  after  ten  years 
[of  penance]  according  to  the  prescribed  degrees. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  to  Canon  XXV. 


A  certain  body  after  being  engaged  to  marry 
a  young  girl,  violates  her  sister  and  then  takes 
her  to  wife.  The  first  is  suffocated.  All  who 
were  cognizant  of  the  affair  arc  to  be  subject  to 
penance  for  ten  years. 

I  have  followed  the  usual  translation 
"  hanged  herself,"  which  is  the  ordinary  dic- 
tionary-meaning of  u7rayxw>  hut  Hefele  says 


that  it  signifies  any  and  every  variety  of 
suicides. 

Balsamon. 

In  this  case  we  have  many  nefarious  crimes 
committed,  fornication,  unlawful  marriage 
[i.e.  with  the  sister  of  one's  mistress]  and 
murder.  In  that  case  [mentioned  by  St. 
Basil  in  Canon  lxxviij.  -where  only  seven  years 
penance  is  enjoined]  there  is  only  a  nefarious 
marriage  [i.e.  with  a  wife's  sister]. 


THE    COUNCIL    OF    NEOC^ESAREA 

:.."':     A.D.  315    (circa).        ;.  ...  ." 

(Hefele  thinks  somewhat  later,  but  before  325.) 

.".      Elenclms,  ,    . 


"Historical  Note. 

The  Canons  with  the  Ancient  Epitome  and  Notes. 


HISTOKICAL  NOTE. 

(Zonaras  and  Balsamon  prefix  to  the  canons  this  note.) 

The  Synod  gathered  together  at  Neocsesarea,  which  is  a  city  of  Pontus,  is  next  in  order 
after  that  of  Ancyra,  and  earlier  in  date  than  the  rest,  even  than  the  First  Ecumenical  Synod 
at  Nice.  In  this  synod  the  Holy  Fathers  gathered  together,  among1  whom  was  the  holy 
Martyr  Basil,  bishop  of  Amasea,  adopted  canons  for  the  establishing  of  ecclesiastical  order 
as  follow — 


79 


THE  CANONS  OF  THE  HOLY  AND  BLESSED  FATHERS  WHO  ASSEM- 
BLED AT  NEOCLESAREA,  WHICH  ARE  INDEED  LATER  IN  DATE 
THAN  THOSE  MADE  AT  ANCYRA,  BUT  MORE  ANCIENT  THAN  THE 
NICENE:  HOWEVER,  THE  SYNOD  OF  NICE  HAS  BEEN  PLACED 
BEFORE  THEM  ON  ACCOUNT  OF  ITS  PECULIAR  DIGNITY.1 

(Annotations  by  Routh,  and  reprint  of  the  Notes  of  Christopher  Justellus  and  of  Bp. 
Beveridge  will  be  found  in  Vol.  iv.  of  the  Reliquiae  Sacrce.) 


CANON  I. 

If  a  presbyter  marry,  let  him  be  removed  from  his  order ;  but  if  he  commit  forni- 
eation  or  adultery,  let  him  be  altogether  cast  out  [i.e.  of  communion]  and  put  to 
penance. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  I. 

If  a  presbyter  marries  lie  shall  be  deposed 
from  his  order.  If  he  commits  adultery  or 
whoredom  he  shall  be  expelled,  and  shall  be  put 
to  penance. 

Aeistenus. 

A  presbyter  who  marries  is  removed  from 
the  exercise  of  the  priesthood  but  retains  his 
honour  and  seat.  But  he  that  commits  for- 
nication or  adultery  is  cast  forth  altogether 
and  put  to  penance. 

Van  Espen. 
These  fathers  [i.e.  of  Neoc&sarea]  shew 
how  much  graver  seemed  to  them  the  sin  of 
the  presbyter  who  after  ordination  committed 
fornication  or  adultery,  than  his  who  took  a 
wife.  For  the  former  they  declare  shall  sim- 
ply be  deposed  from  his  order  or  deprived  of 
the  dignity  of  the  Priesthood,  but  the  latter 
is  to  "be  altogether  cast  out,  and  put  to  pen- 


ance." .  .  .  Therefore  such  a  presbyter 
not  only  did  they  remove  from  the  priestly 
functions,  or  the  dignity  of  the  priesthood, 
but  perfectly  or  altogether  cast  him  out  of 
the  Church. 

This  canon  Gratian  has  inserted  in  the 
Corpus  Juris  Canon ici.  Dccrctum.  Pars  I., 
Dist.  xxviii.,  c.  ix.  Gratian  has  followed  Isi- 
dore in  adding  after  the  word  "penance" 
the  words  "  among  the  laity "  (inter  laicos) 
which  do  not  occur  in  the  Greek,  (as  is  noted 
by  the  Roman  Correctors)  nor  in  the  version 
of  Dionysius  Exiguus  ;  these  same  correctors 
fall  however  themselves  into  a  still  graver 
error  in  supposing  that  criminous  clerks  in 
the  early  days  of  the  Church  were  sent  out  to 
wander  over  the  country,  as  Van  Espen  well 
points  out. 

On  the  whole  subject  of  the  marriage  of 
the  clergy  in  the  Early  Church  see  the  Excur- 
sus devoted  to  that  subject. 


CANON  II. 

If  a  woman  shall  have  married  two  brothers,  let  her  be  cast  out  [i.e.  of  communion] 
until  her  death.  Nevertheless,  at  the  hour  of  death  she  may,  as  an  act  of  mercy,  be  re- 
ceived to  penance,  provided  she  declare  that  she  will  break  the  marriage,  should  she 
recover.  But  if  the  woman  in  such  a  marriage,  or  the  man,  die,  penance  for  the  siirvivor 
shall  be  very  difficult. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  II. 

A  woman  married  to  two  brothers  shall  be  ex- 
pelled  all  her  life.  But  if  ivhen  near  her  death 
she  promises  that  she  ivill  loose  the  marriage 
should  shcrecover,  sheshallbe  admitted  topenance. 

1  This  is  the  title  in  the  Paris  edition  of  Zonaras. 


But  if  one  of  those  coupled  together  die,  only  with 
great  difficulty  shall  penitence  be  allowed  to  the 
one  still  living. 

It  will  be  carefully  observed  that  this  canon 
has  no  provision  for  the  case  of  a  man  marry- 
ing two  sisters.     It  is  the  prohibited  degree 


80 


NEOCiESAREA.     A.D.  315 


of  brother's  wife,  not  that  of  wife's  sister 
which  is  in  consideration.  Of  course  those 
who  hold  that  the  affinity  is  the  same  in  each 
case  will  argue  from  this  canon  by  parity  of 
reasoning,  and  those  who  do  not  accept  that 
position  will  refuse  to  do  so. 

In  the  Greek  test  of  Balsamon  (Vide  Bev- 
eridge,  Synod.)  after  the  first  clause  is  added, 
"if  she  will  not  be  persuaded  to  loose  the 
marriage." 

Van  Espen. 

The  meaning  of  this  canon  seems  to  be  that 
which  Balsamon  sets  forth,  to  wit,  that  if  a 
woman  at  the  point  of  death  or  in  extremis 
promises  that  if  she  gets  better  she  will  dis- 
solve the  marriage,   or  make  a  divorce,  or 


abstain  from  the  sacrilegious   use  of   matri- 
mony, then  "■  she  may  be  received  to  penance 
as  an  act  of  mercy  " ;  and  surely  she  is  im- 
|  mediately  absolved  from  the  excommunica- 
.  tion  inflicted  upon  her  when  she  was  cast  out 
\  and    extruded  from  the  Church.      For  it  is 
;  certain  that  according  to  the  discipline  of  the 
Fathers  he  was  thought  to  be  loosed  from  ex- 
,  communication    whoever    was    admitted    to 
|  penance,  and  it  is    of    this   that  the   canon 
speaks  ; x  but  he  did  not  obtain  perfect  recon- 
ciliation until  his  penance  was  done. 

To  this  performance  of  penance  this  woman 
was  to  be  admitted  if  she  got  well  and  dis- 
solved the  marriage  according  to  her  promise 
made  when  she  was  in  peril  of  death,  as  the 
Greek  commentators  note  ;  and  this  too  is 
the  sense  given  by  Isidore. 


CANON  III. 

Concerning  those  who  fall  into  many  marriages,  the  appointed  time  of  penance  is 
well  known ;  but  their  manner  of  living  and  faith  shortens  the  time. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  III. 
The  time  of  polygamists  is  ivcll  known.     A  seed 
for  penance  may  shorten  it. 

Hefele. 
As  the  Greek  commentators  have  remarked, 
this  canon  speaks  of  those  who  have  been 
married  more  than  twice.  It  is  not  known 
what  were  the  ancient  ordinances  of  peni- 
tence which  the  synod  here  refers  to.  In 
later  times  digamists  were  condemned  to  one 
year's  penance,  and  trigamists  from  two  to  five 
years.  St.  Basil  places  the  trigamists  for 
three  years  among  the  "  hearers,"  and  then 
for  some  time  among  the  consistentes. 

Van  Espen. 

"The  appointed  time  of  penance  is  well 
known."  These  words  Zonaras  notes  must 
refer  to  a  custom,  for,  says  he,  "  before  this 
synod  no  canon  is  found  which  prescribes  the 
duration  of  the  penance  of  bigamists  [i.e.  diga- 
mists]." It  is  fortius  reason  that  St.  Basil  says 
(in  Epist.  ad  Amphilogium,  Can.  4)  in  speaking 
of  the  penance  of  trigamists  "  we  have  re- 
ceived this  by  custom  and  not  by  canon,  but 
from  the  following  of  precedent,"  hence  the 
Fathers  received  many  things  by  tradition, 
and  observed  these  as  having  the  force  of  law. 

From  the  last  clause  of  this  canon  we  see 
the  mind  of  the  Fathers  of  this  synod,  which 

1  Van  Espen  gives  "fructum  pccnitcnticc  consequatur"  as  the 
translation  of  efet  r'rjv  fxeTiivoiay. 


agrees  with  that  of  Ancyra  and  Nice,  that 
with  regard  to  the  granting  of  indulgences, 
ro  in  shortening  the  time  of  penance,  atten- 
tion must  be  paid  to  the  penitence,  and  con- 
versation, or  "  conversation  and  faith  "  of  each 
one  separately. 

With  this  agrees  Zonaras,  whose  remarks 
are  worthy  of  consideration.  On  this  whole 
subject  of  the  commutation  of  the  primitive 
penance  and  of  the  rise  of  the  modern  indul- 
gences of  the  Roman  Church  Van  Espen  has 
written  at  length  in  his  excursus  Dc  Indul- 
gentiis  (Jure  Eeelcs.,  P.  I.  i.,  Tit.  vij.)  in  which 
he  assigns  the  change  to  the  end  of  the  Xlth 
century,  and  remarks  that  its  introduction 
caused  the  "  no  small  collapse  of  penitential 
discipline."  3 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian,  Deeretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 
xxxi.,  Qusest.  i,  c.  viij.  where  for  "  conver- 
sio,"  (arao-rpocjir))  is  read  "  conversatio,"  and 
the  Greek  word  is  used  in  this  sense  in 
Polybius,  and  frequently  so  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment. 


"  The  reader  is  referred  also  to  Amort,  De  Origine,  progressu. 
valore  ac  fructu  Indulgentiarmn ,  and  to  the  article  "  Ablass  " 
in  the  Kirchen  Lexicon  of  Wetzer  and  Welte.  Also  for  the  Eng- 
lish reader  to  T.  L.  Green,  D.D.,  Indulgences,  Absolutions,  ayid, 
Tax  tables,  etc.  Some  of  the  difficulties  which  Roman  theologians 
experience  in  explaining  what  are  called  "  Plenary  Indulgences" 
are  set  forth  by  Dr.  Littledale  in  his  Plain  Reasons  against  joining 
the  Church  of  Rome,  in  which  the  matter  is  discussed  in  the 
usual  witty,  and  unscrupulous  fashion  of  that  brilliant  writer. 
But  while  this  remark  is  just,  it  should  also  be  remarked  that 
ater  the  exaggeration  is  removed  there  yet  remains  a  difficulty 
offthe  most  serious  character, 


NEOC^ESAREA.     A.D.  315 


81 


CANON  IV. 

If  any  man  lusting  after  a  woman  purposes  to  lie  with  her,  and  his  design  does  not 
come  to  effect,  it  is  evident  that  he  has  been  saved  by  grace. 


NOTES, 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  IV. 


Whoso  histeth  but  doth  not  accomplish  Ms  pleas- 
ure is  preserved  of  God. 

Hefele. 
Instead  of  einSvix^a-ai  we  must  read,  with 
Beveridge  and  Bouth,  who  rely  upon  several 
MSS.,    £7rt5t^o-as.      They  also    replace   /*er' 

avTrj<i  by  avrfj. 

The  meaning  of  the  canon  appears  to  me  to 
be  very  obscure.  Hefele  refers  to  Van  Espen 
and  adopts  his  view,  and  Van  Espen  in  turn 
has  adopted  Fleury's  view  and  given  him 
credit  for  it,  referring  to  his  Histoire  Ecclesias- 
tiqiie,  Lib.  X.,  xvij.  Zonaras'  and  Balsamon's 
notes  are  almost  identical,  I  translate  that  of 
the  latter  in  full.    . 

Balsamon. 
In  sins,  the  Fathers  say,  there  are  four 
stages,  the  first-motion,  the  struggle,  the  con- 
sent, and  the  act :  the  first  two  of  these  are 
not  subject  to  punishment,  but  in  the  two 
others  the  case  is  different.  For  neither  is  the 
first  impression  nor  the  struggle  against  it  to 
be  condemned,  provided  that  when  the  rea- 


son receives  the  impression  it  struggles  with 
it  and  rejects  the  thought.  But  the  consent 
thereto  is  subject  to  condemnation  and  accu- 
sation, and  the  action  to  punishment.  If 
therefore  anyone  is  assailed  by  the  lust  for  a 
woman,  and  is  overcome  so  that  he  would 
perform  the  act  with  her,  he  has  given  con- 
sent, indeed,  but  to  the  work  he  has  not 
come,  that  is,  he  has  not  performed  the  act, 
and  it  is  manifest  that  the  grace  of  God  has 
preserved  him  ;  but  he  shall  not  go  off  with 
impunity.  For  the  consent  alone  is  worthy 
of  punishment.  And  this  is  plain  from  canon 
lxx.  of  St.  Basil,  which  says ;  "  A  deacon 
polluted  in  lips  (iv  x^eo-i) "  or  who  has  ap- 
proached to  the  kiss  of  a  woman  "and  con- 
fesses that  he  has  so  sinned,  is  to  be  inter- 
dicted his  ministry,"  that  is  to  say  is  to  be 
prohibited  its  exercise  for  a  time.  "  But  he 
shall  not  be  deemed  unworthy  to  communi- 
cate in  sacris  with  the  deacons.  The  same  is 
also  the  case  with  a  presbyter.  But  if  any- 
one shall  go  any  further  in  sin  than  this,  no 
matter  what  his  grade,  he  shall  be  deposed." 
Some,  however,  interpret  the  pollution  of  the 
lips  in  another  way ;  of  this  I  shall  speak  in 
commenting  on  Canon  lxx.  of  St.  Basil,1 


CANON  V. 

If  a  catechumen  coming  into  the  Church  Lave  taken  his  place  in  the  order  of 
catechumens,  and  fall  into  sin,  let  him,  if  a  kneeler,  become  a  hearer  and  sin  no  more, 
But  should  he  again  sin  while  a  hearer,  let  him  be  cast  out. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  V. 
If  a  catechumen  falls  into  a  fault  and  if  while 
a  hieeler  he  sins  no  more,  let  him  he  among  the 
hearers  ;  but  should  he  sin  while  among  the  hear- 
ers, let  him  be  cast  out  altogether. 

Zonaras. 
There  are  two  sorts  of  catechumens.  For 
some  have  only  just  come  in  and  these,  as 
still  imperfect,  go  out  immediately  after  the 
reading  of  the  scriptures  and  of  the  Gospels. 
But  there  are  others  who  have  been  for  some 
time  m  preparation  and  have  attained  some 

VOL,    XIV, 


porfection  ;  these  wait  after  the  Gospel  for 
the  prayers  for  the  catechumens,  and  when 
they  hear  the  words  "Catechumens,  bow 
down  your  heads  to  the  Lord,"  they  kneel 
down.  These,  as  being  more  perfect,  having 
tasted  the  good  words  of  God,  if  they  fall,  are 
removed  from  their  position  ;  and  are  placed 
with  the  "  hearers  "  ;  but  if  any  happen  to  sin 
while  "hearers"  they  are  cast  out  of  the 
Church  altogether. 


1  Balsamon's  note  is  most  curious  reading,  but  beside  being 
irrelevant  to  the  present  canon  of  Neocresarea,  Vfould  hardly  bear 
translation  into  the  vernacular, 


S3 


NEOCiESAREA.     A.D.  315 


CANON  VI. 

Concerning  a  woman  with  child,  it  is  determined  that  she  ought  to  be  baptized 
whensoever  she  will ;  for  in  this  the  woman  communicates  nothing  to  the  child,  since 
the  bringing  forward  to  profession  is  evidently  the  individual  [privilege]  of  every 
single  person, 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VI. 

If  a  woman  with  child  so  desires,  let  her  be 
baptized.  For  the  choice  of  each  one  is  judged 
of* 

Van  Espen. 

That  tlie  reason  of  the  canon  may  be 
understood  it  must  be  noted  that  in  the  first 
ages  of  the  Church  catechumens  were 
examined  concerning  their  faith  before  they 
were  baptized,  and  were  made  publicly  to 
confess  their  faith  and  to  renounce  openly 
the    pomps   of    the   world,    as  Albaspinams 


(Aubespine)  observes  on  this  canon,  "A 
short  while  before  they  were  immersed  they 
declared  with  a  loud  voice  that  they  desired 
baptism  and  wished  to  be  baptized.  And 
since  these  confessions  could  not  be  made  by 
those  still  shut  up  in  their  parent's  womb,  to 
them  the  thing  (res)  and  grace  of  baptism 
could  not  come  nor  penetrate."  And  alto- 
gether in  accord  with  this  is  the  translation 
of  Isidore — "  because  the  free  will  of  each 
one  is  declared  in  that  confession,"  that  is,  in 
that  confession  he  declares  that  he  willingly 
desires  to  be  baptized. 


CANON   VII. 

A  presbyter  shall  not  be  a  guest  at  the  nuptials  of  persons  contracting  a  second 
marriage ;  for,  since  the  digamist  is  worthy  of  penance,  what  kind  of  a  presbyter  shall 
he  be,  who,  by  being  present  at  the  feast,  sanctioned  the  marriage  ? 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  or  Canon  VII. 
A  presbyter  ought  not  to  be  present  at  the  mar- 
riage of  digamists.     For  when  that  one1  implores 
favour,  who  will  deem  him  worthy  of  favour. 

Hefele. 

The  meaning  of  the  canon  is  as  follows  : 
"If  the  digamist,  after  contracting  his  second 
marriage,  comes  to  the  priest  to  be  told  the 
punishment  he  has  to  undergo,  how  stands 
the  priest  himself  who  for  the  sake  of  the 
feast  has  become  his  accomplice  in  the 
offence  ?  " 

Van  Espen. 

The  present  canon  again  shews  that  al- 
though the  Church  never  disapproved  of,  nor 
reputed  second  or  still  later  marriages  illicit, 
nevertheless  the  Fathers  enjoined  a  penance 


upon  digamists  and  those  repeating  marriage, 
because  by  this  iteration  they  shewed  their 
incontinence.  As  he  that  contracted  a  sec- 
ond marriage  did  not  sin  properly  speaking, 
and  committed  no  fault  worthy  of  punish- 
ment, therefore  whatever  was  amiss  was  be- 
lieved to  be  paid  off  by  a  lighter  penance, 
and  Zonaras  supposes  that  the  canons  in- 
flicted a  mulct  upon  digamists,  for  saith  he, 
"  Digamists  are  not  allowed  for  one  year  to 
receive  the  Holy  Gifts." 

Zonaras  seems  to  indicate  that  the  disci- 
pline of  the  canon  was  not  in  force  in  his 
time,  for  he  says,  "  Although  this  is  found  in 
our  writings,  yet  we  ourselves  have  seen  the 

|  Patriarch  and  many  Metropolitans   present 
at  the  feast  for  the  second  nuptials  of  the 

I  Emperor." 


CANON  VIII. 

If  the  wife  of  a  layman  has  committed  adultery  and  been  clearly  convicted,  such  [a 
husband]  cannot  enter  the  ministry ;  and  if  she  commit  adultery  after  his  ordination,  he 
must  put  her  away ;  but  if  he  retain  her,  he  can  have  no  part  in  the  ministry  committed 
to  him. 


1  Bp.  Beveridge  for  "  that  one  "  translates  "the  digamist."    The  meaning  is  very  obscure  at  best. 


NEO(LESAKEA.     A.D.  315 


83 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VIII. 


A  layman  whose  wife  is  an  adulteress  cannot 
he  a  clergyman,  and  a  cleric  who  keeps  an  adul- 
teress shall  be  expelled. 

Van  Espen, 

Although  the  Eastern  Church  allows  the 
clergy  to  have  wives,  even  priests,  and  per- 
mits to  them  the  use  of  marriage  after  ordi- 


nation, nevertheless  it  requires  of  them  the 
highest  conjugal  continency,  as  is  seen  by  the 
present  canon.  For  here  it  is  evident  that 
the  Fathers  wished  even  the  smallest  possi- 
ble kind  of  incontinence  to  be  absent  from 
men  dedicated  to  holiness. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretiim,  Pars  I.,  Dist, 
xxxiv.,  c.  xi. 


CANON  IX. 

A  presbyter  who  lias  been  promoted  after  having  committed  carnal  sin,  and  who 
shall  confess  that  he  had  sinned  before  his  ordination,  shall  not  make  the  oblation, 
though  he  may  remain  in  his  other  functions  on  account  of  his  zeal  in  other  respects  ; 
for  the  majority  have  affirmed  that  ordination  blots  out  other  kinds  of  sins.  But  if  he 
do  not  confess  and  cannot  be  openly  convicted,  the  decision  shall  depend  upon  himself. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  IX. 


If  a  presbyter  confess  that  lie  has  sinned,1  let 
him  abstain  from  the  oblation,  and  from  it  only. 
For  certain  sins  orders  remit.  If  he  neither  con- 
fess nor  is  convicted,  let  him  have  power  over  him- 
self. 

Van  Espen. 

Therefore  if  he  who  before  his  ordination 
had  committed  a  sin  of  the  flesh  with  a  wom- 
an, confess  it  after  ordination,  when  he  is 
already  a  priest,  he  cannot  perform  the  priest- 
ly office,  he  can  neither  offer  nor  consecrate 
the  oblations,  even  though  after  his  ordina- 
tion he  has  preserved  uprightness  of  living 
and  been  careful  to  exercise  virtue  ;  as  the 
words  "zeal  in  other  respects"  ("studious  of 
good  ")  Zonaras  rightly  interprets. 

And  since  here  the  consideration  is  of  a  sin 
committed  before  ordination,  and  also  con- 
cerning a  presbyter  who  after  his  ordination 
was  of  spotless  life,  and  careful  to  exercise 
virtue,  the  Fathers  rightly  wished  that   he 


should  not,  against  his  will,  be  deposed  from 
the  priestly  office. 

It  is  certainly  curious  that  this  canon 
speaks  of  ordination  as  in  the  opinion  of  most 
persons  taking  away  all  sins  except  consum- 
mated carnal  offences.  And  it  will  be  noted 
that  the  a<$>iiva.i  must  mean  more  than  that 
they  are  forgiven  by  ordination,  for  they  had 
been  forgiven  long  ago  by  God  upon  true 
contrition,  but  that  they  were  made  to  be 
non-existent,  as  if  they  had  never  been,  so 
that  they  were  no  hinderance  to  the  exercise 
of  the  spiritual  office.  I  offer  no  explanation 
of  the  difficulty  and  only  venture  to  doubt 
the  satisfactory  character  of  any  of  the  ex- 
planations given  by  the  commentators.  More- 
over it  is  hard  to  grasp  the  logical  connexion 
of  the  clauses,  and  what  this  "  blotting  out  " 
of  to.  XoLira  has  to  do  with  the  matter  I  entirely 
fail  to  see.  The  koX  after  ttoXKoI  may  possibly 
suggest  that  something  has  dropped  out. 

This  canon  and  the  following  are  together 
in  the  Corpus  Juris  Canonici,  Gratian's  Deere- 
turn,  Pars  II.,  Causa  xv.,  Qusest.  viii.,  c.  i. 


CANON  X. 

Likewise,  if  a  deacon  have  fallen  into  the  same  sin,  let  him  have  the  rank  of  a 
minister. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  X. 
A  deacon  found  in  the  same  crime  shall  remain 
a  minister  (vTnjpiTtji). 


Aristenus  understands  this  of  fornication. 


Hefele. 

By  ministers  (vnr'jpeTai)  are  meant  inferior 
officers  of  the  Church — the  so-called  minor 
orders,  often  including  the  subdeaeons. 


G  3 


84 


NEOC.ESAREA.     A.D.  315 


This  canon  is  in  the   Corpus  Juris  Canon- 
ici,  ■  Gratian's  Decrctum,  Pars  II.,   Causa  xv., 


following   curious  form :  "  Similiter   et   dia- 
conus,  si  in  eodem  culpte  genere  fuerit  involu- 


Qupcst.  viii,,  united  with  canon  ix.3  and  in  the  '  tus,  sese  a  ministerio  cohibebit." 


CANON  XI. 

Let  not  a  presbyter  be  ordained  before  lie  is  thirty  years  of  age,  even  though  he  be 
in  all  respects  a  worthy  man,  but  let  him  be  made  to  wait.  For  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
was  baptized  and  began  to  teach  in  his  thirtieth  year. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XI. 


Unless  he  be  xxx.  years  of  age  none  shall  he 
presbyter,  even  should  he  be  worthy,  following  the 
example  of  the  baptism  of  our  Saviour. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  I.,  Disk 
lxxviii.,  c.  iv. 

Gkatian. 

(Ut  supra,  Nota.) 

This  is  the  law,  and  we  do  not  read  that 
Christ,  or  John  the  Baptist,  or  Ezechiel,  or 
some  other  of  the  Prophets  prophesied  or 
preached  before  that  age.  But  Jeremiah  and 
Daniel  we  read  received  the  spirit  of  prophecy 
before  they  had  arrived  even  at  youth,  and 
David  and  Solomon  are  found  to  have  been 
anointed  in  their  youth,  also  John  the  Evan- 
gelist, while  still  a  youth,  was  chosen  by  the 
Lord  for  au  Apostle,  and  we  find  that  with  the 
rest  he  was  sent  forth  to  preach  :  Paul  also, 
as  we  know,  while  still  a  young  man  was 
called  by  the  Lord,  and  was  sent  out  to 
pleach.     The  Church  in  like  manner,  when 


necessity  compels,  is  wont  to  ordain  some  un- 
der thirty  years  of  age. 

For  this  reason  Pope  Zacharias  in  his  Let- 
ter to  Boniface  the  Bishop,  number  vi.,  which 
begins  "  Benedictus  Deus"  says, 

C.  v.  In  case  of  necessity  presbyters  may  be 
ordained  at  xxv.  years  of  age. 

If  men  thirty  years  old  cannot  be  found, 
and  necessity  so  demand,  Levites  and  priests 
may  be  ordained  from  twenty-five  years  of  age 
upwards. 

Van  Espex. 

The  power  of  dispensing  was  committed  to 
the  bishop,  and  at  length  it  was  so  frequently 
exercised  that  in  the  space  of  one  centuiy  [i.e. 
by  the  end  of  the  xiith  century]  the  law  be- 
came abrogated,  which  was  brought  about 
by  necessity,  so  that  it  passed  into  law  that  a 
presbyter  could  be  ordained  at  twenty-five. 
And  from  this  it  may  appear  how  true  it  is 
that  there  is  no  surer  way  of  destroying  dis- 
cipline and  abrogating  law  than  the  allowing 
of  dispensations  and  relaxations.  Vide  Thom- 
assinus,  De  Disc.  Eccles.,  Pars.  IV.,  Lib.  I.,  cap. 
4G. 


CANON  XII. 

If  any  one  be  baptized  when  he  is  ill,  forasmuch  as  his  [profession  of]  faith  was  not 
voluntary,  but  of  necessity  [i.e.  though  fear  of  death]  he  cannot  be  promoted  to  the 
presbyterate,  unless  on  account  of  his  subsequent  [display  of]  zeal  and  faith,  and 
because  of  a  lack  of  men. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XII. 


Aeistenus. 


One  baptized  on  account  of  sielcncss  is  not  to  be  He  that  is  baptised  by  reason  of  illness, 
made  presbyter,  unless  in  reward  for  a  contest '  and,  therefore  come  to  his  illumination  not 
which  lie  afterwards  sustains  and  on  account  of  freely  but  of  necessity,  shall  not  be  admitted 


scarcity  of  men. 

The  word  used  in  the  Greek  for  "baptized," 
is  "  illuminated  "  ((poiTiaSf/),  a  very  common 
expression  among  the  ancients. 


to  the  priesthood  unless  both  these  conditions 
concur,  that  there  are  few  suitable  men  to  be 
found  and  that  he  has  endured  a  hard  conflict 
after  his  baptism. 


NEOC.ESAREA.     A.D.  315 


85 


With  this  interpretation  agree  also  Zonaras 
and  Balsamon,  the  latter  expressly  saying, 
"  If  one  of  these  conditions  is  lacking,  the 
canon  must  be  observed."  Not  only  has  Isi- 
dore therefore  missed  the  meaning  by  chang- 
ing the  copulative  into  the  disjunctive  con- 
junction (as  Van  Espen  points  out)  but  Bp. 
Beveridge  has  fallen  into  the  same  error,  not 
indeed  in  the  canon  itself,  but  in  translating 
the  Ancient  Epitome. 

Zonaras  explains  that  the  reason  for  this 


prohibition  -was  the  well-known  fact  that  in 
those  ages  baptism  was  put  off  so  as  the 
longer  to  be  free  from  the  restraints  which 
baptism  was  considered  to  impose.  From 
this  interpretation  only  Aubespine  dissents, 
and  Hefele  points  out  how  entirely  without 
reason. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici;  Gratian's  Decretum.,  Pars.  I.,  Dist. 
lvii.,  c.  i. 


CANON  XIII. 

Country  presbyters  may  not  make  the  oblation  in  the  church  of  the  city  when  the 
bishop  or  presbyters  of  the  city  are  present ;  nor  may  they  give  the  Bread  or  the  Cup 
with  prayer.  If,  however,  they  be  absent,  and  ho  [i.e.,  a  country  presbyter]  alone  be 
called  to  prayer,  he  may  give  them. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canons  XIII.  and  XIV. 

A  country  presbyter  shall  not  offer  in  the  city 
temple,  unless  the  bishop  and  the  tohole  body  of  the 
presbyters  are  away.  But  if  wanted  he  can  do  so 
while  they  arc  away.  The  chorcpiscopi  can 
offer  as  fellow  ministers,  as  they  hold  the  place  of 
the  Seventy. 

Routh  reads  the  last  clause  in  the  plural, 
in  this  agreeing  with  Dionysius  Exiguus  and 
Isidore.  In  many  MSS.  this  canon  is  united 
with  the  following  and  the  whole  number 
given  as  14. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Pars  I.,    Dist.  xcv.,  c.  xii.     And  the 


Roman   correctors  have  added  the  following 
notes. 

Roman  Corkectors. 

(Gratian  ut  supra.) 
"  Nor  to  give  the  sacrificed  bread  and  to 
hand  the  chalice  ;  "  otherwise  it  is  read  "  sanc- 
tified "  [sanctificatum  for  saerificatum].  The 
Greek  of  the  council  is  aprov  StSoVat  iv  evxfj ; 
but  Balsamon  has  aprov  eu^s,  that  is,  "  the 
bread  of  the  mystic  prayer." 

Instead  of  "  let  them  only  who  are  called 
for  giving  the  prayer,  etc.,"  read  koI  eh  ei^v 
i<\rj9rj  /xoros  St'Swcrir,  that  is  :  "  and  only  he  that 
shall  have  been  called  to  the  mystic  prayer, 
shall  distribute." 


CANON  XIV. 

The  chorepiscopi,  however,  are  indeed  after  the  pattern  of  the  Seventy  ;  and  as 
fellow-servants,  on  account  of  their  devotion  to  the  poor,  they  have  the  honour  of  mak- 
ing the  oblation. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  or  Canon  XIV. 
[Vide   ante,  as    in    many   MSS.     the    two 
canons  are  united  in  the  Ancient  Epitome.] 

Van  Espen. 
The  reference  to  the  Seventy  seems  to  inti- 
mate that  the  Synod  did  not  hold  the  chore- 
piscopi to    be    true    bishops,  as    such  were 
always  reputed  and  called  successors,  not  of 


the  Seventy  disciples  but  successors  of  the 
Twelve  Apostles.  It  is  also  clear  that  their 
chief  ministry  was  thought  to  be  the  care  of 
the  poor. 

Zonaras  and  Balsamon  would  seem  to 
agree  in  this  with  Van  Espen.  See  on  the 
whole  subject  the  Excursus  on  the  Chore- 
piscopi. 


SO 


NEOC^ESAREA.     A.D.  315 


CANON  XV. 

The  deacons  ought  to  be  seven  in  number,  according  to  the  canon,  even  if  the  city 
be  great.     Of  this  you  will  be  persuaded  from  the  Book  of  the  Acts. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  oe  Canon  XV. 


Seven  Deacons  according  to  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles  should  be  appointed  for  each  great  city. 

This  canon  was  observed  in  Rome  and  it 
was  not  until  the  xith  century  that  the  num- 
ber of  the  Seven  Cardinal  Deacons  was 
changed  to  fourteen.  That  Gratian  received 
it  into  the  Decretum  (Pars.  I.,  Dist.  XCIII.,  c. 
xij.)  is  good  evidence  that  he  considered  it 
part  of  the  Roman  discipline.  Eusebius  1 
gives  a  letter  of  Pope  Cornelius,  written 
about  the  middle  of  the  third  century,  which 
says  that  at  that  time  there  were  at  Rome 
forty-four  priests,  seven  deacons,  and  seven 
subdeacons  ;  and  that  the  number  of  those  in 
inferior  orders  was  very  great.  Thomassinus 
says  that,  "no  doubt  in  this  the  Roman 
Church  intended  to  imitate  the  Apostles  who 
only  ordained  seven  deacons.  But  the  other 
Churches  did  not  keep  themselves  so  scrupu- 
lously to  that  number."  2 

1  Eusebius,  //.  £'.,  Lib.  VI.,  cap.  xliij. 

3  Thomassin,  Ancicnne  ct  Xouvelle  Disci2>tinc  de  VEglise,  Lib. 
II.,  Chap.  xxix. 


Iu  the  acts  of  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  it 
is  noted  that  the  Church  of  Edessa  had  fif- 
teen priests  and  thirty-eight  deacons.3  And 
Justinian,  we  know,  appointed  one  hundred 
deacons  for  the  Church  of  Constantinople. 
Van  Espen  well  points  out  that  while  this 
canon  refers  to  a  previous  law  on  the  sub- 
ject, neither  the  Council  itself,  nor  the  Greek 
commentators  Balsamon  or  Zonaras  give  the 
least  hint  as  to  what  that  Canon  was. 

The  Fathers  of  Neocsesarea  base  their 
limiting  of  the  number  of  deacons  to  seven 
in  one  city  upon  the  authority  of  Holy  Script- 
ure, but  the  sixteenth  canon  of  the  Quinisext 
Council  expressly  says  that  in  doing  so  they 
showed  they  referred  to  ministers  of  alms, 
not  to  ministers  at  the  divine  mysteries,  and 
that  St.  Stephen  and  the  rest  were  not  dea- 
cons at  all  in  this  latter  sense.  The  reader 
is  referred  to  this  canon,  where  to  defend  the 
practice  of  Constantinople  the  meaning  of 
the  canon  we  are  considering  is  entirely  mis- 
represented. 


3  Acta  Cone.  Chal.,  Actio  s. 


THE  COUNCIL  OF  GANGEA. 

A.D.  325-381. 
Emperor Constantine. 

Elenchus. 

Historical  Introduction.  Synodal  Letter, 

Canons  tvith  the  Ancient  Epitome  and  Notes. 


HISTORICAL  INTRODUCTION. 

With  regard  to  the  Synod  of  Gangra  we  know  little  beside  what  we  learn  from  its  own 
synodal  letter.     Three  great  questions  naturally  arise  with  regard  to  it. 

1.  What  was  its  date  ? 

2.  Who  was  the  Eustathius  it  condemned? 

3.  Who  was  its  presiding  officer  ? 

I  shall  briefly  give  the  reader  the  salient  points  with  regard  to  each  of  these  matters. 

1.  With  regard  to  the  date,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  it  was  after  Nice  and  before  the 
First  Council  of  Constantinople,  that  is  between  325  and  381.  Socrates1  seems  to  place 
it  about  365  ;  but  Sozomen 2  some  twenty  years  earlier.  On  the  other  hand,  Remi  Ceillier 3 
inconsistently  with  his  other  statements,  seems  to  argue  from  St.  Basil's  letters  that  the  true 
date  is  later  than  376.  Still  another  theory  has  been  urged  by  the  Ballerini,  resting  on  the 
supposition  that  the  Eusebius  who  presided  was  Eusebius  of  Csesarea,  and  they  therefore 
fix  the  date  between  362  and  370.  With  this  Mr.  Ffoulkes  agrees,  and  fixes  the  date,4  with 
Pagi,  at  358,  and  is  bold  enough  to  add,  "and  this  was  unquestionably  the  year  of  the  Coun- 
cil." But  in  the  old  collections  of  canons  almost  without  exception,  the  canons  of  Gangra 
precede  those  of  Antioch,  and  Blondel  and  Tillemont 5  have  sustained  this,  which  perhaps  I 
may  call  the  traditional  date. 

2.  There  does  not  seem  to  be  any  reasonable  ground  to  doubt  that  the  person  condemned, 
Eustathius  by  name,  was  the  famous  bishop  of  Sebaste.  This  may  be  gathered  from  both 
Sozomen6  and  Socrates,7  and  is  confirmed  incidentally  by  one  of  St.  Basil's  epistles.8  More- 
over, Eustathius's  See  of  Sebaste  is  in  Armenia,  and  it  is  to  the  bishops  of  Armenia  that  the 
Synod  addresses  its  letter.  It  would  seem  in  view  of  all  this  that  Bp.  Hefele's  words  are  not 
too  severe  when  he  writes,  "Under  such  circumstances  the  statement  of  Baronius,  Du  Pin, 
and  others  (supported  by  no  single  ancient  testimony)  that  another  Eustathius,  or  possibly 
the  monk  Eutactus,  is  here  meant,  deserves  no  serious  consideration,  though  Tillemont  did 
not  express  himself  as  opposed  to  it." 9 

The  story  that  after  his  condemnation  by  the  Synod  of  Gangra  Eustathius  gave  up  wear- 
ing his  peculiar  garb  and  other  eccentricities,  Sozomen  only  gives  as  a  report.10 

3.  As  to  who  was  the  president,  it  seems  tolerably  certain  that  his  name  was  Eusebius — 
if  Sozomen11  indeed  means  it  was  "Eusebius  of  Constantinople,"  it  is  a  blunder,  yet  he  had 
the  name  right.  In  the  heading  of  the  Synodal  letter  Eusebius  is  first  named,  and  as  Gangra 
and  Armenia  were  within  the  jurisdiction  of  Cresarea,  it  certainly  would  seem  natural  to  sup- 
pose that  the  Eusebius  named  was  the  Metropolitan  of  that  province,  but  it  must  be  remem- 
bered that  Eusebius  of  Cappadocia  was  not  made  bishop  until  362,  four  years  after  Mr. 
Ffoulkes  makes  him  preside  at  Gangra.  The  names  of  thirteen  bishops  are  given  in  the 
Greek  text. 

The  Latin  translations  add  other  names,  such  as  that  of  Hosius  of  Cordova,  and  some 
Latin  writers  have  asserted  that  he  presided  as  legate  a  latere  from  the  pope,  e.g.,  Baronius12 
and  Binius.13    Hefele  denies  this  and  says  :  "At  the  time  of  the  Synod  of  Gangra  Hosius  was 


1  Socrat.    H.  B.,  Lib.  II.,  cap.  xliij. 

2  Sozomen.    H.  £,'.,  Lib.  IV.,  cap.  xxiv. 

3  Remi  Ceillier.    Hist.  Gintrale  des  Auteurs  Sacris,  Tom.  IV., 
p.  735. 

4  E.  S.  Ffoulkes,  In  Smith  and  Cheetham,  Diet.  Christ.  Antiq., 
s.  v.  Gangra. 

5 1  am  indebted  to  Hefele  for  this  reference,  and  he  gives  Mi- 
moires,  note  xxvij.,  sur  St.  Basile. 
6Sozom.    H.  £'.,  III.,  xiv. 
'Socrat.    H.  B.,  II.,  xliij. 
8S.  Basil.  M.,  Bp.  cexxiij. 
*  Hefele.    Hist.  Councils,  Vol.  II,,  p.  337. 


10Soz.  H.  B..  Lib.  III.,  cap.  xiv.  It  is  curious  that  Canon 
Venables  in  his  article  "  Eustathius  "  in  Smith  and  Wace,  Diet, 
of  Christ.  Biog.,  gives  the  story  on  Sozomen' s  authority  as 
quoted  by  Hefele,  but  without  giving  Hefele's  warning  that  it 
was  a  mere  rumour.  It  would  seem  that  Canon  Venables  could 
not  have  consulted  the  Greek,  where  the  word  used  is  Adyo? ; 
Hefele  gives  no  reference.  I  have  supplied  this  in  the  beginning 
of  this  note. 

11  Sozomen.    II.  E.,  Lib.  IV.,  cap.  xxiv. 

12  Baronius.     Annal.,  Tom.  iii.,  ad  aim.  361,  n.  44. 

13  Binius.    Annotat.  in  Synod.  Gang. 


90 


GANGEA.     A.D.  325-381 


without  doubt  dead."1  But  such  has  not  been  the  opinion  of  the  learned,  and  Cave'  is  of 
opinion  that  Hosius's  episcopate  covered  seventy  years  ending  with  361,  and  (resting  on  the 
same  opinion)  Pagi  thinks  Hosius  may  have  attended  the  Synod  in  358  on  his  way  back  to 
Spain,  an  opinion  with  which,  as  I  have  said,  Mr.  Ffoulkes  agrees.  It  seems  also  clear  that 
by  the  beginning  of  the  sixth  century  the  Synod  of  Gangra  was  looked  upon  at  Rome  as 
having  been  held  under  papal  authority  ;  Pope  Symmachus  expressly  saying  so  to  the  Roman 
Synod  of  504.     (Vide  Notes  on  Canons  vij.  and  viij.) 

It  remains  only  further  to  remark  that  the  IAbellns  Synodieus  mentions  a  certain  Dius  as 
president  of  the  Synod.  The  Ballarini3  suggest  that  it  should  be  Bios,  an  abbreviation  of 
Eusebius.  Mr.  Ffoulkes  suggests  that  Dius  is  "  probably  Dianius,  the  predecessor  of  Euse- 
bius."  Lightfoot '  fixes  the  episcopate  of  Eusebius  Pamphili  as  between  313  and  337;  and 
states  that  that  of  Eusebius  of  Cpesarea  in  Cappadocia  did  not  begin  until  362,  so  that  the 
enormous  chronological  difficulties  will  be  evident  to  the  reader. 

As  all  the  proposed  new  dates  involve  more  or  less  contradiction,  I  have  given  the  canons 
their  usual  position  between  Neoca;sarea  and  Antioch,  and  have  left  the  date  undetermined. 


1  Hefele.    Hist.  Councils,  Vol.  II.,  p.  327. 

2  Cave.    Hist.  Lit,,  Lib.  I.,  cap.  v. 

3  S.  Leon.,  M.,  Opp.,  cd.  Balleriiti,  Tom,  III.,  p.  ssiv. 


1  Smith  and  Wacc. 
Csesarea. 


Diet.  Christ.  Biog.,  s.  v.  Eusebius  of 


SYNODICAL  LETTEE  OF  THE  COUNCIL  OF  GANGBA. 

Eubebius,  iElian,  Eugenius,  Olympius,  Bithynicus,  Gregory,  Philetus,  Pappus,  Eula- 
lius,  Hypatius,  Proaeresius,  Basil  and  Bassus,1  assembled  in  the  holy  Synod  at  Gangra, 
to  our  most  honoured  lords  and  fellow-ministers  in  Armenia  wish  health  in  the  Lord. 

Foeasmuch  as  the  most  Holy  Synod  of  Bishops,  assembled  on  account  of  certain 
necessary  matters  of  ecclesiastical  business  in  the  Church  at  Gangra,  on  inquiring  also 
into  the  matters  which  concern  Eustathius,  found  that  many  things  had  been  unlawfully 
done  by  these  very  men  who  are  partisans  of  Eustathius,  it  was  compelled  to  make 
definitions,  which  it  has  hastened  to  make  known  to  all,  for  the  removal  of  whatever 
has  by  him  been  done  amiss.  For,  from  their  utter  abhorrence  of  marriage,  and  from 
their  adoption  of  the  proposition  that  no  one  living  in  a  state  of  marriage  has  any  hope 
towards  God,  many  misguided  married  women  have  forsaken  their  husbands,  and  hus- 
bands their  wives :  then,  afterwards,  not  being  able  to  contain,  they  have  fallen  into 
adultery ;  and  so,  through  such  a  principle  as  this,  have  come  to  shame.  They  were 
found,  moreover,  fomenting  separations  from  the  houses  of  God  and  of  the  Church  ; 
treating  the  Church  and  its  members  with  disdain,  and  establishing  separate  meetings 
and  assemblies,  and  different  doctrines  and  other  things  in  opposition  to  the  Churches 
and  those  things  which  are  done  in  the  Church  ;  wearing  strange  apparel,  to  the 
destruction  of  the  common  custom  of  dress ;  making  distributions,  among  themselves 
and  their  adherents  as  saints,  of  the  first-fruits  of  the  Church,  which  have,  from  the 
first,  been  given  to  the  Church ;  slaves  also  leaving  their  masters,  and,  on  account  of 
their  own  strange  apparel,  acting  insolently  towards  their  masters  ;  women,  too,  disre- 
garding decent  custom,  and,  instead  of  womanly  apparel,  wearing  men's  clothes,  think- 
ing to  be  justified  because  of  these  ;  while  many  of  them,  under  a  pretext  of  piety,  cut 
off  the  growth  of  hair,  which  is  natural  to  woman  ;  [and  these  persons  were  found]  fast- 
ing on  the  Lord's  Day,  despising  the  sacredness  of  that  free  day,  but  disdaining  and 
eating  on  the  fasts  appointed  in  the  Church  ;  and  certain  of  them  abhor  the  eating  of 
flesh ;  neither  do  they  tolerate  prayers  in  the  houses  of  married  persons,  but,  on  the 
contrary,  despise  such  prayers  when  they  are  made,  and  often  refuse  to  partake  when 
Oblations  are  offered  in  the  houses  of  married  persons  ;  contemning  married  presbyters, 
and  refusing  to  touch  their  ministrations  ;  condemning  the  services  in  honour  of  the 
Martyrs 2  and  those  who  gather  or  minister  therein,  and  the  rich  also  who  do  not  alien- 
ate all  their  wealth,  as  having  nothing  to  hope  from  God  ;  and  many  other  things  that 
no  one  could  recount.  For  every  one  of  them,  when  he  forsook  the  canon  of  the 
Church,  adopted  laws  that  tended  as  it  were  to  isolation  ;  for  neither  was  there  any 
common  judgment  among  all  of  them  ;  but  whatever  any  one  conceived,  that  he  pro- 
pounded, to  the  scandal  of  the  Church,  and  to  his  own  destruction. 

"Wherefore,  the  Holy  Synod  present  in  Gangra  was  compelled,  on  these  accounts,  to 
condemn  them,  and  to  set  forth  definitions  declaring  them  to  be  cast  out  of  the  Church  ; 
but  that,  if  they  should  repent  and  anathematize  every  one  of  these  false  doctrines,  then 
they  should  be  capable  of  restoration.  And  therefore  the  Holy  Synod  has  particularly 
set  forth  everything  which  they  ought  to  anathematize  before  they  are  received.  And 
if  any  one  will  not  submit  to  the  said  decrees,  he  shall  be  anathematized  as  a  heretic, 
and  excommunicated,  and  cast  out  of  the  Church  ;  and  it  will  behove  the  bishops  to  ob- 
serve a  like  rule  in  respect  of  all  who  may  be  found  with  them. 

>  This  list  o£  names  varies  in  the  different  MSS.  and  versions. 

a  This  phrase  in  the  Greek  has  dropped  out  in  Labbe,  and  Mansi ;  it  is  found  in  Zonaras,  etc. 


THE  CANONS  OF  THE  HOLY  FATHERS  ASSEMBLED  AT  GAN- 
GEA,  WHICH  WERE  SET  FORTH  AFTER  THE  COUNCIL  OF 
NICE.1 

CANON  I. 

If  any  one  shall  condemn  marriage,  or  abominate  and  condemn  a  woman  who  is  a 
believer  and  devout,  and  sleeps  with  her  own  husband,  as  though  she  could  not  enter 
the  Kingdom  [of  heaven]  let  him  be  anathema. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  I. 

Anathema  to  him  who  disregards  legitimate 
marriage. 

When  one  considers  how  deeply  the  early 
church  was  impressed  with  those  passages  of 
Holy  Scripture  which  she  understood  to  set 
forth  the  superiority  of  the  virgin  over  the 
married  estate,  it  ceases  to  be  any  source  of 
astonishment  that  some  should  have  run 
into  the  error  of  condemning  marriage  as 
sinful.  The  saying  of  our  Blessed  Lord  with 
reference  to  those  who  had  become  "eunuchs 
for  the  kingdom  of  heaven's  sake," 2  and  those 
words  of  St.  Paul  "  He  that  giveth  his  virgin 
in  marriage  doeth  well,  but  he  that  giveth  her 
not  in  marriage  doeth  better,"  3  together  with 
the  striking  passage  in  the  Revelation  of 
those  that  were  "  not  defiled  with  women,  for 
they- are  virgins,"1  were  considered  as  set- 
tling the  matter  for  the  new  dispensation. 
The  earliest  writers  are  filled  with  the  praises 
of  virginity.  Its  superiority  underlies  the 
allegories  of  the  Hermes  Pastor  ; 3  St.  Justin 


Martyr  speaks  of  "many  men  and  women  of 
sixty  and  seventy  years  of  age  who  from  their 
childhood  have  been  the  disciples  of  Christ, 
and  have  kept  themselves  uncorrupted,"0  and 
from  that  time  on  there  is  an  ever-swelling 
tide  of  praise  ;  the  reader  must  be  referred 
to  SS.  Cyprian,  Athanasius,  Cyril  of  Jerusa- 
lem, Jerome,  Augustine,  etc.,  etc.  In  fact 
the  Council  of  Trent  (it  cannot  be  denied) 
only  gave  expression  to  the  view  of  all  Chris- 
tian antiquity  both  East  and  West,  when  it 
condemned  those  who  denied  that  "it  is 
more  blessed  to  remain  virgin  or  celibate 
than  to  be  joined  in  marriage."  ' 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonic),  Gratian's  Deeretum,  Pars  I.,  Dis- 
tine,  xxx.,  c.  xii.  (Isidore's  version),  and 
again  Dist.  xxxi.,  c.  viii.  (Dionysius's  version). 
Gratian,  however,  supposes  that  the  canon  is 
directed  against  the  Manichfeans  and  refers 
to  the  marriage  of  priests,  but  in  both  mat- 
ters he  is  mistaken,  as  the  Roman  Correctors 
and  Van  Espen  point  out. 


CANON  II. 

If  any  one  shall  condemn  him  who  eats  flesh,  which  is  without  blood  and  has  not 
been  offered  to  idols  nor  strangled,  and  is  faithful  and  devout,  as  though  the  man  Avere 
without  hope  [of  salvation]  because  of  his  eating,  let  him  be  anathema. 


NOTES. 


.  Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  II. 
Anathema   edso  to  him  who  condemns  the  eat- 
ing of  flesh,  except  tlud  of  a  sajfoccded  animal  or 
that  offered  to  idols. 

Hefele. 
This  canon  also,  like  the  preceding  one,  is 
not  directed  against  the  Gnostics  and  Mani- 


1  This  is  the  title  in  the  Paris  Edition  of  Zonaras.    The  Bod- 
leian text  simply  reads  "  The  Canons  of  the  Synod  at  Gangra." 
»  Matt.  xix.  12. 
3 1  Cor.  vii.  33. 
*  Rev.  xiv.  4. 
6 Hermes  Pastor.    Sim.  x.,  xj. 


cheans,  but  against  an  unenlightened  hyper* 
asceticism,  which  certainly  approaches  the 
Gnostic-Manichean  error  as  to  matter  being 
Satanic.  We  further  see  that,  at  the  time  of 
the  Synod  of  Gangra,  the  rule  of  the  Apos» 
tolic  Synod  with  regard  to  blood  and  tilings 
strangled  was  still  in  force.    With  the  Greeks, 


6  Justin  M.  Apoh,  i.  15. 

7  Cone.  Trid  ,  scssio  xxiv.  De  Matr.,  can.  x.  It  is  curious  to 
note  that  while  Eustathius  and  his  followers  held  all  marriage 
to  he  sinful,  Luther  (at  least  at  one  time)  taught  that  it  was  a  sin 
for  anyone  to  remain  unmarried  who  could  "increase  and  multi- 
ply ! "  The  Synod  of  Gaus:a  in  this  canon  sets  forth  the  un- 
changing position  of  the  Catholic  Church  upon  this  point. 


GANGKA.     A.D.  325-381 


93 


indeed,  it  continued  always  in  force  as  their 
Eucliologies  still  show.  Balsamon  also,  the 
welhknown  commentator  on  the  canons  of 
the  Middle  Ages,  in  his  commentary  on  the 
sixty-third  Apostolic  Canon,  expressly  blames 
the  Latins  because  they  had  ceased  to  observe 
this  command.  What  the  Latin  Church, 
however,  thought  on  this  subject  about  the 
year  400,  is  shown  by  St.  Augustine  in  his 
work  Contra  Faustum,  where  he  states  that 
the  Apostles  had  given  this  command  in  order 
to  unite  the  heathens  and  Jews  in  the  one 
ark  of  Noah  ;  but  that  then,  when  the  barrier 
between  Jewish  and  heathen  converts  had 
fallen,  this  command  concerning  things 
strangled  and  blood  had  lost  its  meaning, 
and  was  only  observed  by  few.  But  still,  as 
late  as  the  eighth  century,  Pope  Gregory  the 


Third  (731)  forbade  the  eating  of  blood  or 
things  strangled  under  threat  of  a  penance 
of  forty  days. 

No  one  will  pretend  that  the  disciplinary 
enactments  of  any  council,  even  though  it  be 
one  of  the  undisputed  Ecumenical  Synods, 
can  be  of  greater  and  more  unchanging  force 
than  the  decree  of  that  first  council,  held  by 
the  Holy  Apostles  at  Jerusalem,  and  the  fact 
that  its  decree  has  been  obsolete  for  centuries 
in  the  West  is  proof  that  even  Ecumenical 
canons  may  be  of  only  temporary  utility  and 
may  be  repealed  by  disuser,  like  other  laws. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonki,  Gratian's  Dccretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist, 
XXX.,  c.  xiii. 


CANON  III. 

If  any  one  shall  teach  a  slave,  under  pretext  of  piety,  to  despise  his  master  and  to 
run  away  from  his  service,  and  not  to  serve  his  own  master  with  good-will  and  all 
honour,  let  him  be  anathema. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  III. 

Anathema   to   him  who  persuades  a  slave  to 
leave  his  master  under  pretence  of  religion. 

Van  Espen. 
This  canon  is  framed  in  accordance  with 
the  doctrine  of  the  Apostle,  in  I.  Timothy, 
chapter  six,  verse  1.  "Let  as  many  servants 
as  are  under  the  yoke  count  their  own  mas- 
ters worthy  of  all  honour,  that  the  name  of 
God  and  his  doctrine  be  not  blasphemed." 
And  again  the  same  Apostle  teaches  his  dis- 
ciple Titus  that  he  should  "  exhort  servants 
to  be  obedient  unto  their  own  masters,  and 
to  please  them  well  in  all  things ;  not  answer- 


ing again  ;  not  purloining,  but  shewing  all 
good  fidelity  ;  that  they  may  adorn  the  doc- 
trine of  God  our  Saviour  in.  all  things." 
(Titus  ii.  9  and  10.) 

These  texts  are  likewise  cited  by  Balsamon 
and  Zonaras. 

This  Canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
[  Canonici,  Gratian's  Deerctum,  Pars.  II.,  Causa 
XVII.,  Q.  IV,  c.  xxxvij.  in  the  version  of  Isi- 
dore, and  again  in  c.  xxxviij.  from  the  collec- 
tions of  Martin  Bracarensis  (so  says  Van 
Espen)  and  assigned  to  a  council  of  Pope 
|  Martin,  Canon  xlvii. 


CANON  IV. 

If  any  one  shall  maintain,  concerning  a  married  presbyter,  that  is  not  lawful  to  par- 
take of  the  oblation  when  he  offers  it,  let  him  be  anathema. 


NOTES 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  IV. 
Anathema  to  him  who  hesitates  to  receive  com- 
mun  ion  from  presbyters  joined  in  matrimony. 

Hefele. 
As  is  well  known,  the  ancient  Church,  as 


tinue  t-o  live  in  matrimony.  Compare  what 
was  said  above  in  the  history  of  the  Council 
of  Nicsea,  in  connection  with  Paphnutius,  con- 
cerning the  celibacy  and  marriage  of  priests  in 
the  ancient  Church.  Accordingly  this  canon 
speaks  of  those  clergy  who  have  wives  and 
now  the  Greek  Church,  allowed  those  clergy  I  live  in  wedlock  ;  and  Baronius,  Binius,  and 
who  married  before  their  ordination  to  con-  I  Mitter-Miiller  gave  themselves  useless  trouble 


94 


GANGRA.     A.D.  325-381 


in  trying  to  interpret  it  as  only  protecting 
those  clergy  who,  though  married,  have  since 
their  ordination  ceased  to  cohabit  with  their 
wives. 

The  so-called  Codex  Ecclesice  Romance  pub- 


lished by  Quesnel,  which,  however,  as  was 
shown  by  the  Ballerini,1  is  of  Gallican  and 
not  Roman  origin,  has  not  this  canon,  and 
consequently  it  only  mentions  nineteen 
canons  of  Gangra. 


CANON  V. 

If  any  one  shall  teach  that  the  house  of  God  and  the  assemblies  held  therein  are  to 
be  despised,  let  him  be  anathema. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  V. 
MHioso  styles  the  house  of  God  contemptible,  let 
Mm  be  anathema. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Dccretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
xxx.,  c.  x.  The  commentators  find  nothing 
to  say  upon  the  canon,  and  in  fact  the  despis- 


ing of  the  worship  of  God's  true  church  is 
and  always  has  been  so  common  a  sin,  that  it 
hardly  calls  for  comment ;  no  one  will  forget 
that  the  Prophet  Malachi  complains  how  in 
his  days  there  were  those  who  deemed  "the 
table  of  the  Lord  contemptible  "  and  said  of 
his  worship  "  what  a  weariness  is  it."  (Mai. 
i.,  7  and  13.) 


CANON  VI. 

If  any  one  shall  hold  private  assemblies  outside  of  the  Church,  and,  despising  the 
canons,  shall  presume  to  perform  ecclesiastical  acts,  the  presbyter  with  the  consent 
of  the  bishop  refusing  his  permission,  let  him  be  anathema. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VI. 

Wlioso  privately  gathers  a    religious  meeting 
let  him  be  anathema. 

Hefele. 

Both  these  canons,  [V.  and  VI.]  forbid  the 
existence    of    conventicles,    and    conventicle 
services.     It  already  appears  from  the  second 
article  of  the  Synodal  Letter  of  Gangra,  that 
the    Eustathians,    through     spiritual    pride,  j 
separated   themselves  from   the   rest  of  the  j 
congregation,  as  being   the  pure   and  holy,  i 
avoided  the  public  worship,  and  held  private 
services  of  their  own.     The  ninth,  tenth,  and 
eleventh  articles  of  the  Synodal  Letter   give 
us  to  understand  that  the  Eustathians  especi-  j 
ally  avoided  the  public  services,  when  married 
clergy  officiated.     We   might  possibly   con- 1 
elude,  from   the  words  of   the  sixth  canon  : 
fj.r)  cruiwros    tov    Tpeafivrepov    Kara     yvutfxrjv    tov 
iwLo-KOTrov,  that  no  priest  performed  any  part  in 
their  private  services  ;  but  it  is  more  proba- 
ble that  the  Eustathians,  who  did  not  reject 
the  priesthood  as  such,  but  only  abhorred  the 


married  clergy,  had  their  own  unmarried 
clergy,  and  that  these  officiated  at  their  sepa- 
rate services.  And  the  above-mentioned 
words  of  the  canon  do  not  the  least  contradict 
this  supposition,  for  the  very  addition  of  the 
words  Kara  yi'wfirjv  tov  iino-KOTrov  indicate  that 
the  sectarian  priests  who  performed  the  ser- 
vices of  the  Eustathians  had  received  no 
permission  to  do  so  from  the  bishop  of  the 
place.  Thus  did  the  Greek  commentators, 
Balsamon,  etc.,  and  likewise  Van  Espen,  inter- 
pret this  canon. 

The  meaning  of  this  canon  is  very  obscure. 
The  Latin  reads  non  convenient^ presbytero,de 
episcopi  sententia ;  and  Lambert  translates 
"without  the  presence  of  a  priest,  with  con- 
sent of  the  bishop."  Hammond  differs  from 
this  and  renders  thus,  "  without  the  concur- 
rence of  the  presbyter  and  the  consent  of  the 
bishop."  I  have  translated  literally  and  left 
the  obscurity  of  the  original. 


•  Vide  their  edition  of  Opp.  S.  Leonis  M.,  Tom.  III.,  pp.  124, 

695,  755. 


GANGRA.     A.D.  325-381 


05 


CANON  VII. 

If  any  one  shall  presume  to  take  the  fruits  offered  to  the  Church,  or  to  give  them 
out  of  the  Church,  without  the  consent  of  the  bishop,  or  of  the  person  charged  with 
such  things,  and  shall  refuse  to  act  according  to  his  judgment,  let  him  be  anathema. 

Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  VII. 

Wlioso  performs  church  acts  contrary  to  the  will  of  a  bishop  or  of  a  presbyter,  let  him  be 
anathema. 


CANON  VIII. 

If  anyone,  except  the  bishop  or  the  person  appointed  for  the  stewardship  of  bene- 
factions, shall  either  give  or  receive  the  revenue,  let  both  the  giver  and  the  receiver  be 
anathema. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  VIII. 


IVlioso  gives  or  receives  offered  fruits,  except 
the  bishop  and  the  economist  appointed  to  disburse 
charities,  both  he  that  gives,  and  he  that  receives 
shall  be  anathema. 

Pope  Symmachus. 

(In  his  Address  to  the  Synod  of  Borne  a.d. 
504.  Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  torn,  iv.,  col, 
1373.) 

In  the  canons  framed  by  Apostolic  author- 
ity [i.e.,  by  the  authority  of  the  Apostolic  See 
of  Rome,  cf.  Ffoulkes,  Smith  and  Cheetham, 
Diet  Christ.  Antiq.,  art.  Gangra]  we  find  it 
written  as  follows  concerning  the  offerings  of 
fruits  which  are  due  to  the  clergy  of  the 
church,  and  concerning  those  things  which 
ai'e  offered  for  the  use  of  the  poor ;  "  If  any- 
one shall  presume,  etc."  [Canon  VII.]  And 
again  at  the  same  council,  "  If  anyone  except 
the  bishop,  etc."     [Canon  VIII.]     And  truly 


it  is  a  crime  and  a  great  sacrilege  for  those 
whose  duty  it  is  chiefly  to  guard  it,  that  is 
for  Christians  and  God-fearing  men  and 
above  all  for  princes  and  rulers  of  this  world, 
to  transfer  and  convert  to  other  uses  the 
wealth  which  has  been  bestowed  or  left  by 
will  to  the  venerable  Church  for  the  remedy 
of  their  sins,  or  for  the  health  and  repose  of 
their  souls. 

Moreover,  whosoever  shall  have  no  care  for 
these,  and  contrary  to  these  canons,  shall 
seek  for,  accept,  or  hold,  or  shall  unjustly 
defend  and  retain  the  treasures  given  to  the 
Church  unless  he  quickly  repent  himself  shall 
be  stricken  with  that  anathema  with  which 
an  angry  God  smites  souls  ;  and  to  him  that 
accepts,  or  gives,  or  possesses  let  there  be 
anathema,  and  the  constant  accompaniment 
of  the  appointed  penalty.  For  he  can  have 
no  defence  to  offer  before  the  tribunal  of 
Christ,  who  nefariously  without  any  regard 
to  religion  has  scattered  the  substance  left 
by  pious  souls  for  the  poor. 


CANON  IX. 

If  any  one  shall  remain  virgin,  or  observe  continence,  abstaining  from  marriage 
because  he  abhors  it,  and  not  on  account  of  the  beauty  and  holiness  of  virginity  itself, 
let  him  be  anathema. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  IX. 


Wioso  xyreserves  virginity  not  on  account  of  its 
beauty  bat  because  he  abhors  marriage,  let  him  be 
anathema. 

The  lesson  taught  by  this  canon  and  that 
which  follows  is  that  the  practice  of  even  the 


highest  Christian  virtues,  such  as  the  preser- 
vation of  virginity,  if  it  does  not  spring  from 
a  worthy  motive  is  only  deserving  of  execra- 
tion. 

ZONARAS. 

Virginity  is  most  beautiful  of  all,  and  conti- 
nence is  likewise  beautiful,  but  only  if  we  fol- 


96 


GANGRA,     A.D.  325-381 


low  theni  for  their  own  sake  and  because  of  the 
sanctification  which  comes  from  them.  But 
should  anyone  embrace  virginity,  because  he 
detests  marriage  as  impure,  and  keep  himself 
chaste,  and  abstains  from  commerce  with  wom- 
en and  marriage,  because  he  thinks  that  they 


are  in  themselves  wicked,  he  tis  subjected  by 
this  canon  to  the  penalty  of  anathema. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Dccrctum,  Pars  I.,  Dist, 
xxx,,  c,  v.,  and  again  Dist.  xxxi.,  c.  ix. 


CANON  X. 

If  any  one  of  those  avIio  are  living  a  virgin  life  for  the  Lord's  sake  shall  treat  arro- 
gantly the  married,  let  him  be  anathema. 


NOTES 
Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  X. 
Whoso  treats  arrogantly  those  joined  in  matri- 
mony, let  him  be  anathema. 


On  this  point  the  fathers  had  spoken  long- 
before,  I  cite  two  as  examples. 

St.  Clement. 
(Epist.  I.,  38,  Lightfoot's  translation.) 
So  in  our  case  let  the  whole  body  be  saved 
in  Christ  Jesus,  and  let  each  man  be  subject 
unto  his  neighbour,  according  as  also  he  was 
appointed  with  his  special  grace.  Let  not 
the  strong  neglect  the  weak  ;  and  let  the 
weak  respect  the  strong.  Let  the  rich  min- 
ister aid  to  the  poor  and  let  the  poor  give 
thanks  to  God,  because  he  hath  given  him 
one  through  whom  his  wants  may  be  sup- 
plied. Let  the  wise  display  his  wisdom,  not 
in  words,  but  in  good  works.  He  that  is 
lowly  in  mind,  let  him  not  bear  testimony  to 
himself,  but  leave  testimony  to  be  borne  to 
him  by  his  neighbour.  He  that  is  pure  in  the 
flesh,  let  him  be  so,1  and  not  boast,  knowing 
that  it  is  Another  who  bestoweth  his  conti- 
nence upon  him.  Let  us  consider,  brethren, 
of  what  matter  we  were  made  ;  who  and  what 
manner  of  beings  we  were,  when  we  came 
into  the  world  ;  from  what  a  sepulchre  and 
what  darkness  he  that  moulded  and  created 


us  brought  us  into  his  world,  having  prepared 
his  benefits  aforehand  ere  ever  we  were  born. 
Seeing  therefore  that  we  have  all  these  things 
from  him,  we  ought  in  all  things  to  give 
thanks  to  him,  to  whom  be  the  glory  for  ever 
and  ever.     Amen. 

St.  Ignatius. 

(Epist.  ad  Polyc.  5,  Lightfoot's  translation.) 

Flee  evil  arts,  or  rather  hold  thou  discourse 
about  these,  Tell  my  sisters  to  love  the  Lord 
and  to  be  content  with  their  husbands  in 
flesh  and  in  spirit.  In  like  manner  also 
charge  my  brothers  in  the  name  of  Jesus 
Christ  to  love  their  wives,  as  the  Lord  loved  the 
Church.  If  anyone  is  able  to  abide  in  chas- 
tity to  the  honour  of  the  flesh  of  the  Lord, 
let  him  so  abide  without  boasting.  If  he 
boast,  he  is  lost  ;  and  if  it  be  known  beyond 
the  bishop,  he  is  polluted.  It  becometh  men 
and  women,  too,  Avhen  they  marry  to  unite 
themselves  with  the  consent  of  the  bishop, 
that  the  marriage  may  be  after  the  Lord  and 
not  after  concupiscence.  Let  all  things  be 
done  to  the  honour  of  God. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
xxx.,  c.  iv. 


CANON  XL 

If  anyone  shall  despise  those  who  out  of  faith  make  love-feasts  and  invite  the 
brethren  in  honour  of  the  Lord,  and  is  not  willing  to  accept  these  invitations  because  he 
despises  what  is  done,  let  him  be  anathema. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XI. 
IVIioso  spurns  those   who  invite  to  the  agape, 
and  who  ivhen  invited, will  not  communicate  with 
tliese,  let  him  be  anathema. 


1  Lightfoot  adopts  Laurents'  emendation  and  reads  >jtu>.    Siyi™    uine  reading.   It  all  comes  to  the  same  thing,  however, 
has  also  been  suggested,  and  Hort's  thinks  o-njTuj  to  be  the  gen-    ing  being  perfectly  clear. 


There  are  few  subjects  upon  which  there 
has  been  more  difference  of  opinion  than 
upon  the  history  and  significance  of  the 
Agapce  or  Love-feasts  of  the  Early  Church. 


r,  the  mean- 


GANGRA.     A.D.  333-381 


To  cite  here  any  writers  would  only  mislead 
the  reader,  I  shall  therefore  merely  state  the 
main  outline  of  the  discussion  and  leave 
every  man  to  study  the  matter  for  himself. 

All  agree  that  these  feasts  are  referred  to  by 
St.  Jude  in  his  Epistle,  and,  although  Dean 
Plumptre  has  denied  it  (Smith  and  Cheetham, 
Did.,  Christ  Antiq.,  s.v.  Agapse),  most  writers 
add  St.  Paul  in  the  First  Epistle  to  the  Corin- 
thians xi.  Estius  (in  he.)  argues  with  great  co- 
gency that  the  expression  "Lord's  Supper  "  in 
Holy  Scripture  never  means  the  Holy  Euchar- 
ist, but  the  love-feast,  and  in  this  view  he  has 
been  followed  by  many  moderns,  but  the  prev- 
alent opinion  has  been  the  opposite. 

There  is  also  much  discussion  as  to  the 
order  in  which  the  Agapse  and  the  celebra- 
tions of  the  Holy  Sacrament  were  related, 
some  holding  that  the  love-feast  preceded 
others  that  it  followed  the  Divine  Mysteries. 
There  seems  no  doubt  that  in  early  times  the 
two  became  separated,  the  Holy  Sacrament 
being  celebrated  in  the  morning  and  the 
Agapse  in  the  evening. 

All  agree   that  these  feasts  were  at  first 


copies  of  the  religious  feasts  common  to  the 
Jews  and  to  the  heathen  world,  and  that 
soon  abuses  of  one  sort  or  another  came  in, 
so  that  they  fell  into  ill  repute  and  were 
finally  prohibited  at  the  Council  in  Trullo. 
This  canon  of  Gangra  is  found  in  the  Corpus 
Juris  Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  I., 
Dist.  xlii.,  c.  i. 

Van  Espen  is  of  opinion  that  the  agapse  of 
our  canon  have  no  real  connexion  with  the 
religious  feasts  of  earlier  days,  but  were 
merely  meals  provided  by  the  rich  for  the 
I  poor,  and  Avith  this  view  Hefele  agrees.  But 
the  matter  is  by  no  means  plain.  In  fact  at 
|  every  point  we  are  met  with  difficulties  and 
uncertainties. 

There  would  seem  to  be  little  doubt  that 
the  "  pain  beni "  of  the  French  Church,  and 
the  "Antidoron"  of  the  Eastern  Church  are 
remains  of  the  ancient  Agapse. 

The  meaning,  however,  of  this  canon  is  plain 
enough,  to  wit,  people  must  not  despise,  out 
of  a  false  asceticism,  feasts  made  for  the  poor 
by  those  of  the  faithful  who  are  rich  and 
liberal.1 


CANON  XII. 

If  any  one,  under  pretence  of  asceticism,  should  wear  a  ])eribolceum  and,  as  if  this 
gave  him  righteousness,  shall  despise  those  who  with  piety  wear  the  berus  and  use 
other  common  and  customary  dress,  let  him  be  anathema. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XII. 


WJioso  despises  those  ivho  wear  bcruscs,  let  him 
be  anathema. 

Hefele. 

The  (3-qpoi  (lacemce)  were  the  common 
upper  garments  worn  by  men  over  the  tunic ; 
but  the  TrepifioXaia.  were  rough  mantles  worn 
by  philosophers  to  show  their  contempt  for 
all  luxury.     Socrates  (H.  E.,  ii.  43)  and  the 


Synodal  Letter  of  Gangra  in  its  third  article 
say  that  Eustathius  of  Sebaste  wore  the 
philosopher's  mantle.  But  this  canon  in  no 
way  absolutely  rejects  a  special  dress  for 
monks,  for  it  is  not  the  distinctive  dress  but 
the  proud  and  superstitious  over-estimation 
of  its  worth  which  the  Synod  here  blames. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
xxx.,  c.  xv. 


CANON  XIII. 

If  any  woman,  under  pretence  of  asceticism,  shall  change  her  apparel  and,  instead 
of  a  woman's  accustomed  clothing,  shall  put  on  that  of  a  man,  let  her  be  anathema. 


NOTES 
Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XIII. 
'Whatever  ivomen   wear  men's   clothes,  anath 
ema  to  them. 

Hefele. 


adoption  by  one  sex  of  the  dress  of  the  other, 
was  forbidden  in  the  Pentateuch  (Deut.  xxii., 
5),  and  was  therefore  most  strictly  inter- 
dicted by  the  whole  ancient  Church.     Such 


The  Synodal   letter   in   its    Sixth  article  also        '  Most   interesting   literature    on  the  whole  subject  will  be 
i       *  *    in  •  u      ,  r.     t  ,i        found  in  connexion  with  the  frescoes  and  cups,  etc.,  found  in 

speaks  of   this.     Exchange  of  dress,  or  the  |  the  catacombs. 


VOL.    XIV. 


II 


98 


GANGRA.     A.D.  325-381 


change  of  attire  was  formerly  adopted  mainly 
for  theatrical  purposes,  or  from  effeminacy, 
wantonness,  the  furtherance  of  unchastity, 
or  the  like.  The  Eustathians,  from  quite 
opposite  and  hyper-ascetical  reasons,  had 
recommended  women  to  assume  male,  that  is 
probably  monk's  attire,  in  order  to  show  that 
for  them,    as   the   holy  ones,  there   Avas  no 


longer  any  distinction  of  sex ;  but  the 
Church,  also  from  ascetical  reasons,  forbade 
this  change  of  attire,  especially  when  joined 
to  superstition  and  puritanical  pride. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canoniei,  Gratian's  Decrektm,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
xxx.,  c.  vi, 


CANON  XIV. 

If  any  woman  shall  forsake  her  husband,  and  resolve  to  depart  from  him  because 
she  abhors  marriage,  let  her  be  anathema. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XIV 


Women  who  keep  (may  from  their  husbands 
because  they  abominate  marriage,  anathema  to 
them. 

Hepele. 

This  canon  cannot  in  any  way  be  employed 
in  opposition  to  the  practice  of  the  Catholic 
Church.  For  though  the  Church  allows  one 
of  a  married  couple,  with  the  consent  of  the 
other,  to  give  up  matrimonial  intercourse, 
and  to  enter  the  clerical  order  or  the  cloister, 
still  this  is  not,  as  is  the  case  with  the  Eusta- 
thians, the  result  of  a  false  dogmatic  theory, 
but  takes  place  with  a  full  recognition  of  the 
sanctity  of  marriage. 


Van  Espen.. 


It  would  seem  that  the  Eustathians  chiefly 
disapproved  of  the  use  of  marriage,  and 
under  pretext  of  preserving  continence  in- 
duced married  women  to  abstain  from  its 
use  as  from  something  unlawful,  and  to  leave 
their  husbands,  separating  from  them  so  far 
as  the  bed  was  concerned  ;  and  so  the  Greek 
interpreters  understand  this  canon ;  for  the 
Eustathians  were  never  accused  of  persuad- 
ing anyone  to  dissolve  a  marriage  a  vinculo. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canoniei,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist., 
xxx.,  c.  iii.,  but  in  Isidore's  version,  which 
misses  the  sense  by  implying  that  a  divorce  a 
vinculo  is  intended.  The  Roman  Correctors 
do  not  note  this  error. 


CANON  XV. 

If  anyone  shall  forsake  his  own  children  and  shall  not  nurture  them,  nor  so  far  as 
in  him  lies,  rear  them  in  becoming  piety,  but  shall  neglect  them,  under  pretence  of 
asceticism,  let  him  be  anathema. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XV, 


Whosoever  they  be  that  desert  tJtcir  children 
and  do  not  instruct  them  in  the  fear  of  God  let 
them  be  anathema. 

Van  Espen.  ■ 

The  fathers  of  this  Synod  here  teach  that 
it  is  the  office  and  duty  of  parents  to  provide 
for  the  bodily  care  of  their  children,  and  also, 
as  far  as  in  them  lies,  to  mould  them  to  the 
practice   of  piety.     And   this  care  for   their 


children  is  to  be  preferred  by  parents  to  any 
private  exercises  of  religion.  In  this  connex- 
ion should  be  read  the  letter  of  St.  Francis 
de  Sales,     (Ep.  xxxii.,  Lib.  4.) 

It  may  perhaps  be  noted  that  this  canon 
has  not  infrequently  been  violated  by  those 
who  are  accepted  as  Saints  in  the  Church. 

This  canon  is  found,  in  Isidore's  version, 
in  the  Corpus  Juris  Canoniei,  Gratian's  Decre- 
tum, Pars  I.,  Dist.  xxx.,  c.  xiv. 


GANGRA.     A.D.  325-381 


99 


CANON  XVI. 

If,  under  any  pretence  of  piety,  any  children  shall  forsake  their  parents,  particularly 
[if  the  parents  are]  believers,  and  shall  withhold  becoming  reverence  from  their  par- 
ents, on  the  plea  that  they  honour  piety  more  than  them,  let  them  be  anathema. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XVI. 


If  children  leave  their  parents  who  are  of  the 
faithful  let  them  he  anathema. 


Zonaras  notes  that  the  use  of  the  word 
"particularly"  shews  that  the  obligation  is 
universal.  The  commentators  all  refer  here 
to  St.  Matthew  xv.,  where  our  Lord  speaks  of 
the  subterfuge  by  which  the  Jews  under  pre- 
text of  piety  defrauded  their  parents  and 
made  the  law  of  God  of  none  effect. 


Van  Espen. 
Of  the  last  clause  this  is  the 
that  according  to  the  Eustathians  "  piety 
towards  God"  or  "divine  worship,"  or  rather 
its  pretence,  should  be  preferred  to  the 
honour  and  reverence  due  to  parents. 

This  canon,  in  Isidore's  version,  is  found  in 
the  Corpus  Juris  Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum, 
Pars  I.,  Dist.  xxx.,  c.  i.  The  Roman  correct- 
ors advertize  the  reader  that  the  version  of 
Dionysius  Exiguus  "  is  much  nearer  to  the 
original  Greek,  although  not  altogether  so." 


CANON  XVII. 

If  any  woman  from  pretended  asceticism  shall  cut  off  her  hair,  which  God  gave  her 
as  the  reminder  of  her  subjection,  thus  annulling  as  it  were  the  ordinance  of  subjection, 
let  her  be  anathema. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XVII. 


Whatever  women  shave  their  hair  off,  pretend- 
ing to  do  so  out  of  reverence  for  God,  let  them  be 
anathema. 

Hefele. 

The  apostle  Paul,  in  the  first  Epistle  to  the 
Corinthians,  xi.  10,  represents  the  long  hair 
of  women,  which  is  given  them  as  a  natural 
veil,  as  a  token  of  their  subjection  to  man. 
We  learn  from  the  Synod  of  Gangra,  that  as 
many  Eustathian  women  renounced  this  sub- 
jection, and  left  their  husbands,  so,  as  this 
canon  says,  they  also  did  away  with  their  long 
hair,  which  was  the  outward  token  of  this  sub- 
jection.    An  old  proverb  says  :1  duo  si  faciunt 


idem,  non  est  idem.  In  the  Catholic  Church 
also,  when  women  and  girls  enter  the  cloister, 
they  have  their  hair  cut  off,  but  from  quite 
other  reasons  than  those  of  the  Eustathian 
women.  The  former  give  up  their  hair,  be- 
cause it  has  gradually  become  the  custom  to 
consider  the  long  hair  of  women  as  a  special 
beauty,  as  their  greatest  ornament ;  but  the 
Eustathians,  like  the  ancient  Church  in 
general,  regarded  long  hair  as  the  token  of 
subjection  to  the  husband,  and,  because  they 
renounced  marriage  and  forsook  their  hus- 
bands, they  cut  it  off. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris  Can- 
onici, Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist.  xxx.,  c.  ij. 


CANON  XVIII. 
If  any  one,  under  pretence  of  asceticism,  shall  fast  on  Sunday,  let  him  be  anathema. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XVIII. 
'Whoso  fasts  on  the  Lord's  day  or  on  the  Sab- 
bath let  him  be  anathema. 


Zonaras. 

Eustathius  appointed  the  Lord's  day  as  a 
fast,  whereas,  because  Christ  rose  from  the 


II   2 


100 


GANGRA.     A.D.  325-381 


grave  and  delivered  human  nature  from  sin 
on  that  day,  we  should  spend  it  in  offering- 
joyous  thanks  to  God.  But  fasting  carries 
with  it  the  idea  of  grief  and  sorrow.  For  this 
reason  those  who  fast  on  Sunday  are  subject- 
ed to  the  punishment  of  anathema. 

Balsamon. 
By  many  canons  we   are   warned   against 
fasting  or  grieving  on  the  festal  and  joyous 
Lord's  day,  in  remembrance  of  the  resurrec- 
tion of  the  Lord",  but  that  we  should  cele- 


brate it  and  offer  thanks  to  God,  that  we  be 
raised  from  the  fall  of  sin.  But  this  canon 
smites  the  Eustathians  with  anathema  because 
they  taught  that  the  Lord's  days  should  be 
fasted.  Canon  LXIV.  of  the  Apostolic  Canons 
cuts  off  such  of  the  laity  as  shall  so  fast,  and 
deposes  such  of  the  clergy.  See  also  Canon 
LV.  of  the  Council  in  Trullo. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Dccrctum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
xxx.,  c.  vij. 


CANON  XIX. 

If  any  of  the  ascetics,  without  bodily  necessity,  shall  behave  with  insolence  and 
disregard  the  fasts  commonly  prescribed  and  observed  by  the  Church,  because  of  his 
perfect  understanding  in  the  matter,  let  him  be  anathema. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XIX. 


Whoso  neglects  the  fasts  of  the  Church,  let  him 
he  anathema. 

I  have  followed  Hefele's  translation  of  the 
last  clause,  with  which  Van  Espen  seems  to 
agree,  as  well  as  Zonaras.  But  Hardouin  and 
Mansitake  an  entirely  different  view  and  trans- 
late "  if  the  Eustathian  deliberately  rejects  the 
Church  fasts."  Zonoras  and  Balsamon  both 
refer  to  the  LXIXth  of  the  Apostolical  Canons 
as  being  the  law  the  Eustathians  violated. 
Balsamon  suggests  that  the  Eustathians 
shared  the  error  of  the  Bogomiles  on  the 


subject  of  fasting,  but  I  see  no  reason  to 
think  that  this  was  the  case,  Eustathius's 
action  "seems  rather  to  be  attributable  to 
pride,  and  a  desire  to  be  different  and  origi- 
nal, "I  thank  thee  that  I  am  not  as  other 
men  are,"  (as  Van  Espen  points  out).  All 
that  Socrates  says  (H.  K,  II.,  xliii.,)  is  that 
"he  commanded  that  the  prescribed  fasts 
should  be  neglected,  and  that  the  Lord's 
days  should  be  fasted." 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decrctum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
xxx.,  c.  viii.,  in  an  imperfect  translation  but 
not  that  of  either  Isidore  or  Dionysius. 


CANON  XX. 

If  any  one  shall,  from  a  presumptuous  disposition,  condemn  and  abhor  the  assem- 
blies [in  honour]  of  the  martyrs,  or  the  services  performed  there,  and  the  commemora- 
tion Of  them,  let  him  be  anathema. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XX. 


Whoever  thinks  lightly  of  the  meetings  in 
honour  of  the  holy  martyrs,  let  him  he  anathema. 

Hefele. 

Van  Espen  is  of  opinion  that  the  Eusta- 
thians had  generally  rejected  the  common 
service  as  only  fit  for  the  less  perfect,  and 
that  the  martyr  chapels  are  only  mentioned 
here,  because  in  old  times  service  was  usually 
held    there.      According    to    this    view,   no 


especial  weight  need  be  attached  to  the 
expression.  But  this  canon  plainly  speaks 
of  a  disrespect  shown  by  the  Eustathians  to 
the  martyrs.  Compare  the  twelfth  article  of 
the  Synodal  Letter.  Fuchs  thought  that,  as 
the  Eustathians  resembled  the  Aerians,  who 
rejected  the  service  for  the  dead,  the  same 
views  might  probably  be  ascribed  to  the 
Eustathians.  But,  in  the  first  place,  the 
Aerians  are  to  be  regarded  rather  as  opposed 
than  related  in  opinion  to  the  Eustathians, 
being  lax  in  contrast  to  these  ultra-rigorists, 


GANGBA.     A.D.  325-381 


101 


Besides  which,  Epiphanius  ouly  says  that 
they  rejected  prayer  for  the  salvation  of  the 
souls  of  the  departed,  but  not  that  they  did 
not  honour  the  martyrs ;  and  there  is  surely 
a  great  difference  between  a  feast  in  honour 
of  a  saint,  and  a  requiem  for  the  good  of  a 
departed  soul.  Why,  however,  the  Eusta- 
thians  rejected  the  veneration  of  martyrs  is 
nowhere  stated ;  perhaps  because  they  con- 
sidered themselves  as  saints,  ko.t  e&xrjv,  exalted 
above  the  martyrs,  who  were  for  the  most 
part  only  ordinary  Christians,  and  many  of 


whom  had  lived  in  marriage,  while  according 
to  Eustathian  views  no  married  person  could 
be  saved,  or  consequently  could  be  an  object 
of  veneration. 

Lastly,  it  must  be  observed  that  the  first 
meaning  of  enW£is,  is  an  assembly  for  divine 
service,  or  the  service  itself;  but  here  it 
seems  to  be  taken  to  mean  avvaywyi)  the  place 
of  worship,  so  that  the  crwa|«s  twv  fiapTvprnv 
seems  to  be  identical  with  martyria,  and 
different  from  the  Xtnovpyiai  held  in  them,  of 
which  the  latter  Avords  of  the  canon  speak. 


EPILOGUE. 

These  things  we  write,  not  to  cut  off  those  who  Avish  to  lead  in  the  Church  of  God 
an  ascetic  life,  according  to  the  Scriptures  ;  but  those  who  carry  the  pretence  of  asceti- 
cism to  superciliousness  ;  both  exalting  themselves  above  those  who  live  more  simply, 
and  introducing  novelties  contrary  to  the  Scriptures  and  the  ecclesiastical  Canons.  We 
do,  assuredly,  admire  virginity  accompanied  by  humility ;  and  we  have  regard  for  con- 
tinence, accompanied  by  godliness  and  gravity  ;  and  we  praise  the  leaving  of  worldly 
occupations,  [when  it  is  made]  with  lowliness  of  mind ;  [but  at  the  same  time]  Ave 
honour  the  holy  companionship  of  marriage,  and  Ave  do  not  contemn  Avealth  enjoyed  with 
uprightness  and  beneficence ;  and  Ave  commend  plainness  and  frugality  in  apparel,  [Avhich 
is  Avorn]  only  from  attention,  [and  that]  not  over-fastidious,  to  the  body  ;  but  dissolute 
and  effeminate  excess  in  dress  Ave  escheAv  ;  and  Ave  reverence  the  houses  of  God  and  em- 
brace the  assemblies  held  therein  as  holy  and  helpful,  not  confining  religion  Avithin  the 
houses,  but  reverencing  every  place  built  in  the  name  of  God  ;  and  Ave  approve  of  gath- 
ering together  in  the  Church  itself  for  the  common  profit ;  and  Ave  bless  the  exceeding 
charities  done  by  the  brethren  to  the  poor,  according  to  the  traditions  of  the  Church  ; 
and,  to  sum  up  in  a  word,  Ave  Avish  that  all  things  Avhich  have  been  delivered  by  the 
Holy  Scriptures  and  the  Apostolical  traditions,  may  be  observed  in  the  Church. 


NOTES. 


This  is  lacking  in  the  ancient  epitome  ;  and 
while  it  occurs  after  Canon  XX.  in  the  ver- 
sions of  Dionysius  Exiguus  and  of  Isidore 
Mercator,  it  is  not  numbered  as  a  canon. 
Moreover  in  John  of  Antioch's  Collection  and 
in  Photius's  Nomocanon,  the  number  of  canons 
is  said  to  be  20.  Only  the  Greek  Scholiasts 
number  it  as  Canon  XXL,  but  its  genuine- 
ness is  unquestioned. 

It  is  curiously  enough  found  in  the  Corpus 
Juris  Canonic!,  diAided  into  two  canons  !  Gra- 
tian's  Becrctum,  Pars  I.,  Dist.  XXX,  c.  xvj., 
and  Dist.  xli.,  c.  v. 

Van  Espen. 
The  Fathers  of  Gangra  recognize  not  only 
the  Holy  Scriptures,  but  also  the  Apostolical 
traditions  for  the  rule  of  morals. 


From  this  [canon]  it  ia  by  no  means  doubt- 
ful that  the  fathers  of  this  Synod  considered 
that  the  Eustathians  had  violated  some  al- 
ready existing  ecclesiastical  canons.  Bever- 
idge  is  of  opinion  that  these  are  those  com- 
monly called  the  Canons  of  the  Apostles 
{Synod.  I.  5).  Nor  is  this  unlikely  to  be  true, 
for  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  doctrines 
of  the  Eustathians  condemned  by  this  synod 
are  directly  opposed  to  those  very  "  Canons 
of  the  Apostles  "  ;  and  no  small  argument  is 
draAvn  for  the  authority  and  antiquity  of  the 
Canons  of  the  Apostles  from  the  large  num- 
ber of  Eustathian  teachings  found  to  be 
therein  condemned,  as  Beveridge  has  pointed 
out  and  as  can  easily  be  seen  by  comparing 
the  tAvo. 


THE  SYNOD  OF  ANTIOCH  IN  ENCJ2NIIS. 

A.D.  341. 

Elenchus. 
Historical  Introduction.  The  Synodal  Letter, 

The  Canons,  ivith  the  Ancient  Epitome  and  Notes. 


HISTORICAL  INTRODUCTION. 

Of  the  Synod  of  Antioch  which  adopted  the  canons  subsequently  received  into  the  code 
of  the  universal  church  we  knoAV  the  exact  date.  This  is  fixed  by  the  fact  that  the  synod 
was  held  at  the  time  of  the  dedication  of  the  great  church  in  Antioch,  known  as  the 
"  Golden,"  which  had  been  beguu  by  his  father,  Constantine  the  Great,  and  was  finished  in 
the  days  of  Constantius.  The  synod  has  for  this  reason  always  been  known  as  the  Synod 
of  Antioch  in  Encceniis,  i.e.,  at  the  dedication  (in  Dedicatione),  and  was  holden  in  the  summer 
of  the  year  341.  Ninety-seven  bishops  assembled  together  and  a  large  number  of  them  were 
hostile  to  St.  Athanasius,  being  professed  Eusebians,  all  of  them  were  Orientals  and  most 
of  them  belonged  to  the  patriarchate  of  Antioch.  Not  a  single  Western  or  Latin  bishop  was 
present  and  the  pope,  Julius,  was  in  no  way  represented.  This  fact  gave  Socrates  the  histo- 
rian the  opportunity  of  making  the  statement  (around  which  such  polemics  have  raged), 
that  "  an  ecclesiastical  canon  commands  that  the  churches  should  not  make  decrees  against 
the  opinion  of  the  bishop  of  Rome."  l 

But  while  this  much  is  all  clear,  there  is  no  council  that  presents  a  greater  amount  of 
difficulty  to  the  historian  as  well  as  to  the  theologian.  No  one  can  deny  that  St.  Hilary  of 
Poictiers,  who  was  a  contemporary,  styled  it  a  Synod  of  Saints  (Synodus  Sanctorum) 2 ;  that 
two  of  its  canons  were  read  at  Chalcedon  as  the  "  canons  of  the  Holy  Fathers  "  ;  and  that 
Popes  John  II.,  Zacharias,  and  Leo.  IV.  all  approved  these  canons,  and  attributed  them  to 
"  Holy  Fathers."  And  yet  this  synod  set  forth  creeds  ^to  rival  that  of  Nice,  and,  it  is  said, 
that  some  of  the  canons  were  adopted  to  condemn  Athanasius. 

Various  attempts  have  been  made  to  escajje  from  these  difficulties. 

It  has  been  suggested  that  there  really  were  two  Synods  at  Antioch,  the  one  orthodox, 
which  adopted  the  canons,  the  other  heretical. 

Father  Emanuel  Schelstraten,  S.  J. 3  improved  on  this  theory.  He  supposed  that  the 
Eusebians  stopped  behind  in  Antioch  after  the  orthodox  bishops  left  and  then  passed  the 
decrees  against  Athanasius,  giving  out  that  the  synod  was  still  in  session.  This  has  been 
adopted  by  Pagi,  Remi  Ceillier,  "Walch,  and  to  a  certain  extent  by  Schrockk  and  others.  But 
Tillemont  demurs  to  this  view,  urging  that  according  to  Socrates  4  the  deposition  of  Atha- 
nasius came  first  and  the  adoption  of  the  canons  afterwards.  But  Tillemont  would  seem  to 
have  misunderstood  Socrates  on  this  point  and  this  objection  falls  to  the  ground.  But  an- 
other objection  remains,  viz.,  that  both  Socrates  and  Sozomen  say  that  the  creeds  were  drawn 
up  after  the  deposition  of  Athanasius,  "  and  yet  "  (as  Hefele  remarks,  Vol.  II.,  p.  63),  "  St. 
Hilary  says  that  these  creeds  proceeded  from  a  '  Synod  of  Saints.' " 

Schelstraten's  hypothesis  not  being  satisfactory,  the  learned  Ballerini,  in  their  appendix 
to  the  Opera  S.  Lconis  M.,  have  set  forth  another  theory  with  which  Mansi  agrees  in  his 
"  Notes  on  Alexander  Natalis's  Church  History."  These  maintain  that  the  canons  did  not 
come  from  the  Council  in  Encceniis  at  all,  but  from  another  synod  held  before,  in  332  ;  but 
Hefele  rejects  this  hypothesis  altogether,  on  the  following  grounds.  First  and  chiefest  be- 
cause it  has  no  external  evidence  to  support  it ;  and  secondly  because  the  internal  evidence  is 
most  unsatisfactory.  But  even  if  the  25  canons  were  adopted  by  a  synod  at  Antioch  in  332, 
the  real  difficulty  would  not  be  obviated,  for  Socrates  says  5  of  that  synod  that  there  too  the 


'Socrates.  H.  E.,  Lib,  II.,  cap.  viij.  Hefele  thinks  the  state- 
ment may  rest  upon  nothing  more  than  the  letter  of  Julius  I.  that 
the  matter  should  first  have  been  referred  to  Rome.  (Hefele. 
Hist.  Councils,  Vol.  n.,  p.  59,  n.  2.)  But  the  word  used  by  Soc- 
lates  is  xavdvl 


2  Hilar.  Pict.  De  Synodis,  seu  de  Fide  Orient.,  C.    xxxii.    Ed. 
Ben.,  1170. 

3  Schelstraten,  S.  J.  Sacrum  Antioehenum  Concil.  auctoritati 
suce  restitution.  (Ant.  1680.) 

4  Socrates.    H.  E.,  Lib.  n.,  Cap.  viij. 
6  Socrates.    H.  E.,  Lib.  I.,  Cap.  xxiv. 


106  ANTIOCH  IN  ENCiENIIS.     A.D.  311 

"  opposers  of  the  Niceue  faith  "  were  able  to  elect  their  candidate  to  fill  the  place  of  the 
banished  bishop  Eustathius  ! 

Hefele  seems  to  give  the  true  solution  of  the  whole  difficulty  when  he  says :  "  Certainly 
Athanasius  identified  the  Eusebians  with  the  Arians  and  we  regard  them  as  at  least  Semi- 
arians  ;  but  at  that  time,  after  they  had  made  the  orthodox  confession  of  faith,  and  repeatedly 
declared  their  disapproval  of  the  heresies  condemned  at  Nice,  they  were  considered,  by  the 
greater  number,  as  lawful  bishops,  and  thoroughly  orthodox  and  saintly  men  might  with- 
out hesitation  unite  with  them  at  a  synod."  L 

Pope  Julius  styles  the  very  Eusebian  synod  that  deposed  Athanasius  "dear  brethren" 
while  blaming  their  action,  and  invited  them  to  a  common  synod  to  enquire  into  the  charges 
made  against  the  Saint.  In  view  of  all  this  we  may  well  believe  that  both  orthodox  and 
Eusebians  met  together  at  the  consecration  of  the  Emperor's  new  church,  and  that  the  whole 
church  afterwards  awarded  the  canons  then  adopted  a  rank  in  accordance  with  their  intrin- 
sic worth,  and  without  any  regard  to  the  motives  or  shades  of  theological  opinion  that 
swayed  those  who  drafted  and  voted  for  them. 

i  Hefele.  History  of  the  Councils.  Vol.,  II.,  p.  6G.    I  have  in  tbie  introduction  done  little  more  than  condense  Hefele. 


THE  SYNODAL  LETTER. 

(Found  in  Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  II.,  col.  559.  It  really  is  no  part  of 
the  canons,  but  I  have  placed  it  here,  because,  as  Labbe  notes,  "  it  is  usually  prefixed  to  the 
canons  in  the  Greek.") 

The  holy  and  most  peaceful  Synod  which  has  been  gathered  together  in  Antioch  from 
the  provinces  of  Coele-Syria,  Phoenicia,  Palestine,  Arabia,  Mesopotamia,  Cilicia,  and 
Isauria  ; 1  to  our  like-minded  and  holy  fellow  Ministers  in  every  Province,  health  in  the 
Lord. 

The  grace  and  truth  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ  hath  regarded  the  holy 
Church  of  the  Antiochians,  and,  by  joining  it  together  with  unity  of  mind  and  concord 
and  the  Spirit  of  Peace,  hath  likewise  bettered  many  other  things ;  and  in  them  all 
this  betterment  is  wrought  by  the  assistance  of  the  holy  and  peace-giving  Spirit. 
Wherefore,  that  which  after  much  examination  and  investigation,  was  unanimously 
agreed  upon  by  us  bishops,  who  coming  out  of  various  Provinces  have  met  together  in 
Antioch,  we  have  now  brought  to  your  knowledge  ;  trusting  in  the  grace  of  Christ  and 
in  the  Holy  Spirit  of  Peace,  that  ye  also  will  agree  with  us  and  stand  by  us  as  far  as 
in  you  lies,  striving  with  us  in  prayers,  and  being  even  more  united  with  us,  following 
the  Holy  Spirit,  uniting  in  our  definitions,  and  decreeing  the  same  things  as  we  ;  ye,  in 
the  concord  which  proceedeth  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  sealing  and  confirming  what  has 
been  determined. 

Now  the  Canons  of  the  Church  which  have  been  settled  are  hereto  appended. 

1  Hefele  thinks  this  list  of  provinces  is  probably  an  interpolation.    In  the  Latin  version  this  letter  is  followed  by  the  names  of 
the  bishops, 


THE   CANONS    OF   THE   BLESSED   AND  HOLY   FATHERS   AS- 
SEMBLED AT  ANTIOCH   IN  SYRIA.1 


CANON  I. 

Whosoever  shall  presume  to  set  aside  tlie  decree  of  the  holy  and  great  Synod 
which  was  assembled  at  Nice  in  the  presence  of  the  pious  Emperor  Constantine,  beloved 
of  God,  concerning  the  holy  and  salutary  feast  of  Easter  ;  if  they  shall  obstinately  per- 
sist in  opposing  what  was  [then]  rightl}  ordained,  let  them  be  excommunicated  and 
cast  out  of  the  Church ;  this  is  said  concerning  the  laity.  But  if  any  one  of  those  who 
preside  in  the  Church,  whether  he  be  bishop,  presbyter,  or  deacon,  shall  presume,  after 
this  decree,  to  exercise  his  own  private  judgment  to  the  subversion  of  the  people  and  to 
the  disturbance  of  the  churches,  by  observing  Easter  [at  the  same  time]  with  the  Jews, 
the  holy  S}7nod  decrees  that  he  shall  thenceforth  be  an  alien  from  the  Church,  as  one 
who  not  only  heaps  sins  upon  himself,  but  who  is  also  the  cause  of  destruction  and  sub- 
version to  many ;  and  it  deposes  not  only  such  persons  themselves  from  their  ministry, 
but  those  also  who  after  their  deposition  shall  presume  to  communicate  with  them. 
And  the  deposed  shall  be  deprived  even  of  that  external  honour,  of  which  the  holy 
Canon  and  God's  priesthood  partake. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  I. 


Whoso  endeavours  to  change  the  lawful  tradi- 
tion of  Easter,  if  he  be  a  layman  let  him  be  ex- 
communicated, but  if  a  cleric  let  him  be  cast  out  of 
the  Church. 

The  connexion  between  these  canons  of 
Antioch  and  the  Apostolical  Canons  is  so 
evident  and  so  intimate  that  I  shall  note  it,  in 
each  case,  for  the  convenience  of  the  student. 

Zonaras  and  Balsamon  both  point  out  that 
from  this  first  canon  it  is  evident  that  the 
Council  of  Nice  did  take  action  upon  the 
Paschal  question,  and  in  a  form  well  known 
to  the  Church. 

Van  Espen. 
From  this  canon  it  appears  that  the  fathers 
did  not  deem   laymen  deserving   of   excom- 
munication who  merely  broke  the  decrees,  but 
only  those  who  "obstinately  persist  in  oppos- 


ing the  decrees  sanctioned  and  received  by 
the  Church  ;  for  by  their  refusal  to  obey  they 
are  attempting  to  overturn."  And  this  being 
the  case,  why  should  such  not  be  repelled  or 
cast  forth  from  the  Church  as  rebels  ? 

Finally  this  Canon  proves  that  not  only 
bishops  and  presbyters,  but  also  deacons  were 
reckoned  among  them  who,  "preside  in  the 
Church."  An  argument  in  favour  of  the 
opinion  that  the  deacons  of  that  time  were 
entrusted  with  hierarchical  functions. 

It  is  curious  that  as  a  matter  of  fact  the 
entire  clergy  and  people  of  the  West  fell 
under  the  anathema  of  this  canon  in  1825, 
when  they  observed  Easter  on  the  same  day 
as  the  Jews.  This  was  owing  to  the  adoption 
of  the  Gregorian  calendar,  and  this  misfort- 
une while  that  calendar  is  followed  it  is  al- 
most impossible  to  prevent.2 

Compare  Apostolic  Canons  ;  Canon  VII. 


CANON  II. 

All  who  enter  the  church  of  God  and  hear  the  Holy  Scriptures,  but  do  not  com- 
municate with  the  people  in  prayers,  or  who  turn  away,  by  reason  of  some  disorder,  from 
the  holy  partaking  of  the  Eucharist,  are  to  be  cast  out  of  the  Church,  until,  after  they 
shall  have  made  confession,  and  having  brought  forth  the  fruits  of  penance,  and  made 


1  This  is  the  title  in  the  codices  of  Zoraras  ;  the  Parisian  edition  I      -  There  seems  but  little  doubt  that  the  Gregorian  Calendar  will 
of  Balsamon  simply  reads  "  The  Synod  at  Antioch."    The  Bod-    be  introduced  before  many  years  into  Russia, 
leian  MS.  reads  "  Canons  of  the  Synod  at  Antioch  in  Syria." 


ANTIOCH  IN  ENCiENIIS.     A.D.  341 


109 


earnest  entreaty,  they  shall  have  obtained  forgiveness ;  and  it  is  unlawful  to  communi- 
cate with  excommunicated  persons,  or  to  assemble  in  private  houses  and  pray  with  those 
who  do  not  pray  in  the  Church  ;  or  to  receive  in  one  Church  those  who  do  not  assemble 
with  another  Church.  And,  if  any  one  of  the  bishops,  presbyters,  or  deacons,  or  any 
one  in  the  Canon  shall  be  found  communicating  with  excommunicated  persons,  let  him 
also  be  excommunicated,  as  one  who  brings  confusion  on  the  order  of  the  Church. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  II. 


Whoso  comes  to  church,  and  attentively  hears 
(lie  holy  Scriptures,  and  then  despises,  goes  forth 
from,  and  turns  his  bach  upon  the  Communion,  let 
him  be  cast  out,  until  after  having  brought  forth 
fruits  of  penance,  he  shall  be  indulged.  And  who- 
so communicates  with  one  excommunicated,  shall 
be  excommunicated,  and  ivhoso  prays  with  him  ivho 
prays  not  with  the  Church  is  guilty,  and  even 
whoso  receives  him  who  does  not  attend  the  ser- 
vices of  the  Church  is  not  without  guilt. 

Balsamon. 
In  the  Eighth  and  Ninth  canons  of  the 
Apostles  it  is  set  forth  how  those  are  to  be 
punished  who  will  not  wait  for  the  prayers, 
and  the  holy  Communion :  So,  too,  in  the 
Tenth  canon  provision  is  made  with  respect 
to  those  who  communicate  with  the  excom- 
municated. In  pursuance  of  this  the  present 
canon  provides  that  they  are  to  be  cut  off 
who  come  to  church  and  do  not  wait  for  the 
prayer,  and  through  disorder  [?  dra£iai>]  1  will 
not  receive  the  holy  Communion  ;  for  such 
are  to  be  cast  out  until  with  confession  they 
shew  forth  worthy  penance. 

Zonaras. 
In  this  canon  the  Fathers  refer  to  such  as 
go  to  church  but  will  not  tarry  to  the  prayer 
nor  receive  holy  Communion,  held  back  by 
some  perversity  or  license,  that  is  to  say  with- 
out any  just  cause,  but  petulantly,  and  by 
reason  of  some  disorder  [dTa£tai'] ;  these  are 


forbidden  to  be  expelled  from  the  Church, 
that  is  to  say  cut  off  from  the  congregation  of 
the  faithful.  But  the  Fathers  call  it  a  turn- 
ing away  from,  not  a  hatred  of  the  divine 
Communion,  which  holds  them  back  from 
communion  ;  a  certain  kind  of  flight  from  it, 
brought  about  perchance  by  reverence  and 
lowliness  of  mind.  Those  who  object  to  com- 
municate by  reason  of  hatred  or  disgust,  such 
must  be  punished  not  with  mere  separation, 
but  by  an  altogether  absolute  excommunica- 
tion, and  be  cursed  with  anathema. 

It  need  hardly  be  remarked  that  this  canon 
has  no  reference  to  such  of  the  faithful  as 
tarry  to  the  end  of  the  service  and  yet  do  not 
partake  of  the  holy  sacrament,  being  held 
back  by  some  good  reason,  recognized  by  the 
Church  as  such.  It  will  be  remembered  that 
the  highest  grade  of  Penitents  did  this  habit- 
ually, and  that  it  was  looked  upon  as  a  great 
privilege  to  be  allowed  to  be  present  when 
the  Divine  Mysteries  were  performed,  even 
though  those  assisting  as  spectators  might 
not  be  partakers  of  them.  What  this  canon 
condemns  is  leaving  the  Church  before  the 
service  of  the  Holy  Eucharist  is  done  ;  this 
much  is  clear,  the  difficulty  is  to  understand 
just  why  these  particular  people,  against 
whom  the  canon  is  directed,  did  so. 

This  canon  should  be  compared  with  the 
Apostolic  canons  viij.,  ix.,  x.,  xj.,  xij.  and 
xiij. 


CANON  III. 

If  any  presbyter  or  deacon,  or  any  one  whatever  belonging  to  the  priesthood,  shall  for- 
sake his  own  parish,  and  shall  depart,  and,  having  wholly  changed  his  residence,  shall 
set  himself  to  remain  for  a  long  time  in  another  parish,  let  him  no  longer  officiate  ;  espe- 
cially if  his  own  bishop  shall  summon  and  urge  him  to  return  to  his  own  parish  and  he 
shall  disobey.  And  if  he  persist  in  his  disorder,  let  him  be  wholly  deposed  from  his 
ministry,  so  that  no  further  room  be  left  for  his  restoration.  And  if  another  bishop 
shall  receive  a  man  deposed  for  this  cause,  let  him  be  punished  by  the  Common  Synod 
as  one  who  nullifies  the  ecclesiastical  laws. 


1 1  confess  I  do  not  know  what  the  phrase  koto  riva  ara^iav 
means,  nor  do  the  Greek  Commentators  give  much  help.  I  have 
translated  "  by  reason  of  some  disorder"  in  the  canon  itself,  and 
in  the  notes,  but  Beveridge  renders  it  propter  aliquam  insolen- 


tiam,  which  to  me  appears  very  unsatisfactory.  The  pro  qaos- 
dam  intern perantia  of  the  ordinary  Latin  seems  no  better.  The 
same  word  is  used  in  the  next  canon, 


110 


ANTIOCH  IN  ENC/ENIIS.     A.D.  341 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  III. 


If  any  cleric  leaves  his  own  parish  and  (joes  off 
to  another,  travelling  here  and  there,  and  stays  for 
a  long  time  in  that  other,  let  him  not  offer  the  sacri- 
fice (AetTovpyetVw),  especially  if  lie  do  not  return 
when  called  by  his  own  bishop.  But  if  he  per- 
severes in  his  insolence  let  him  be  deposed,  neither 
afterwards  let  him  have  any  power  to  return.  And 
if  any  bishop  shall  receive  him  thus  deposed,  he 


shall  be  punished  by  the  Common  Synod  for  breach 
of  the  ecclesiastical  laics. 

Compare  with  Canons  of  the  Apostles  xv, 
and  xvi. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonic!,  Gratian's  Becretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 
VII,,  Qusest.  I.,  Can.  xxiv.1 


CANON  IV. 

If  any  bishop  who  has  been  deposed  by  a  synod,  or  any  presbyter  or  deacon  who 
has  been  deposed  by  his  bishop  shall  presume  to  execute  any  part  of  the  ministry, 
whether  it  be  a  bishop  according  to  his  former  custom,  or  a  presbyter,  or  a  deacon,  he 
shall  no  longer  have  any  prospect  of  restoration  in  another  Synod  ;  nor  any  opportunity 
of  making  his  defence ;  but  they  who  communicate  with  him  shall  all  be  cast  out  of  the 
Church,  and  particularly  if  they  have  presumed  to  communicate  with  the  persons  afore- 
mentioned, knowing  the  sentence  pronounced  against  them. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  IV. 
Jf  a  bishop  deposed  by  a  synod  shall  dare  to 
celebrate  the  liturgy,  let  him  have  no  chance  of  re- 
turn. 

This  canon  derives  its  chief  interest  from 
the  fact  that  it  is  usually  considered  to  have 
been  adopted  at  the  instigation  of  the  party 
ojoposed  to  St.  Athanasius  and  that  afterwards 
it  was  used  against  St.  Chrysostom.  But  while 
such  may  have  been  the  secret  reason  why 
some  voted  for  it  and  others  prized  it,  it 
must  be  remembered  that  its  provision  is 
identical  with  that  of  the  Apostolic  Canons, 
and  that  it  was  read  at  the  Council  of  Chal- 
cedon  as  Canon  eighty-three.  Remi  Ceillier 
(Histoirc  General  des  Autheurs,  p.  G59)  tries  to 
prove  that  this  is  not  the  canon  which  St. 


Chrysostom  and  his  friends  rejected,  but  He- 
fele  thinks  his  position  "altogether  unten- 
able "  (Hist,  of  the  Councils,  Vol.  II.,  p.  62,  n. 
1),  and  refers  to  Tillemont  (Memoires,  p.  329, 
Sur  les  Avians,  and  Fuchs'  Bib.  dev  Kirchen- 
versammlungen,  P.  II.,  p.  59. 2) 

Compare  Apostolic  Canon  xxviij. 

This  canon  is  found  twice  in  the  Juris  Cor- 
pus Canonic!,  Gratian's  Becretum,  Pars  II., 
Causa  XL,  Qua?st.  III.,  Can.  vj.,  and  Can.  vij. 
in  the  version  of  Martin  Bracarensis.  This 
version  is  very  interesting  as  expanding  the 
phrase  "  to  execute  any  part  of  the  ministry  " 
into  "  to  make  the  oblation,  or  to  perform  the 
morning  or  evening  sacrifice  as  though  he 
were  in  office  just  as  before,  etc." 


CANON  V. 

If  any  presbyter  or  deacon,  despising  his  own  bishop,  has  separated  himself  from  the 
Church,  and  gathered  a  private  assembly,  and  set  up  an  altar ;  and  if,  when  summoned 
by  his  bishop,  he  shall  refuse  to  be  persuaded  and  will  not  obey,  even  though  he  sum- 
mon him  a  first  and  a  second  time,  let  such  an  one  be  wholly  deposed  and  have  no  fur- 
ther remedy,  neither  be  capable  of  regaining  his  rank.  And  if  he  persist  in  troubling 
and  disturbing  the  Church,  let  him  be  corrected,  as  a  seditious  person,  by  the  civil 
power. 


1  Uefe'.e  seems  to  have  overlooked  this.  The  note  referring  to 
the  Apostolic  Canons  is  all  wrong  (p.  68,  n.  1.) 

aHefele  on  the  preceding  page  (p.  61,  n.  1)  says  "Of  course 
the  sentence  or  canon  to  which  the  adversaries  of  Chrysostom  re- 
ferred must  be  distinguished  from  the  fourth  and  twelfth  true  An- 
tioehian  canons.    It  seems  somewhat  difficult  to  reconcile  this 


with  what  I  have  cited  above,  and  with  the  following  (p.  65):  "In 
the  affair  of  St.  Chrysostom  the  canon  employed  against  him  was 
represented  as  proceeding  from  the  Ariaus.  and  all  attempts  to 
deny  its  identity  with  our  fourth  and  twelfth  Antiochian  canons 
are  "fruitless." 


ANTIOCH  IN  ENCJENIIS.     A.D.  341 


111 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  or  Canon  V. 


Any  presbyter  or  deacon  who  spurns  his  bishop, 
and  ivithdraivs  from  him,  and  sets  tip  another 
altar,  if  after  being  thrice  called  by  the  bishop,  he 
shall  persist  in  his  arroyancy,  let  him  be  deposed 
and  be  deprived  of  all  hope  of  restoration . 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  Ancient  Epitome 
mentions  three  warnings,  and  the  canon  only 
two.  The  epitome  in  this  evidently  follows 
the  Apostolical  Canon,  number  thirty-one.  It 
is  somewhat  curious  that  Aristenus  in  com- 
menting on  this  canon  does  not  note  the  dis- 
crepancy. 

Van  Espen. 

This  canon,  together  with  the  preceding 
was  read  from  the  Code  of  Canons  at  the  Coun- 
cil of  Chalcedon,  at  the  Fourth  Session  in 
connexion  with  the  case  of  Carosus  and  Dor- 
otheeus,  and  of  other  monks  who  adhered  to 
them.  And  a  sentence  in  accordance  with 
them  was  conceived  in  these  words  against 
those  who  would  not  obey  the  Council  in  the 
condemnation  of  Eutyches,  "Let  them  know 


that  they  together  with  the  monks  who  are 
with  them,  are  deprived  of  grade,  and  of  all  dig- 
nity, and  of  communion,  as  wrell  as  he,  so  that 
they  cease  to  preside  over  their  monasteries  : 
and  if  they  attempt  to  escape,  this  holy  and  uni- 
versal great  council  decrees  the  same  punish- 
ment shall  attach  to  them,  that  is  to  say  the  ex- 
ternal authority,  according  to  the  divine  and 
holy  laws  of  the  Fathers,  shall  carry  out  the 
sentence  passed  against  the  contumacious." 

This  canon  shews  that  monks  and  clerics 
who  were  rebellious  were  sometimes  coerced 
by  the  Secular  Power,  when  the  ecclesiastical 
power  was  not  sufficient  to  coerce  them,  and 
hence  it  was  that  the  secular  arm  was  called 
in. 

Compare  with  this  Apostolic  Canon  XXXI. 

The  last  clause  of  this  canon  is  found  in  the 
Corpus  Juris  Canonic i,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars 
II.  Causa  XI,  Qua>st  VIII.  Can.  vij.  (The 
Latin  however  for  "  by  the  civil  power  "  is,  as 
is  pointed  out  by  the  Roman  Correctors,  per 
forinsccam  potestatcm  or  per  forasticam  potes- 
tatem. 


CANON  VI. 

If  any  one  lias  been  excommunicated  by  liis  own  bishop,  let  him  not  be  received  by 
others  until  he  has  either  been  restored  by  his  own  bishop,  or  until,  when  a  synod  is 
held,  he  shall  have  appeared  and  made  his  defence,  and,  having  convinced  the  synod, 
shall  have  received  a  different  sentence.  And  let  this  decree  apply  to  the  laity,  and  to 
presbyters  and  deacons,  and  all  who  are  enrolled  in  the  clergy-list. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VI. 


The  sentence  of  the  greater  synod  upon  a  clerk 
excommunicated  by  his  bishop,  whether  of  acquittal 
or  condemnation,  shall  stand. 


Compare  Apostolic  Canons  numbers  XII. 
and  XXXII. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Deeretum,  Pars  II,  Causa 
XI,  Qutest.  Ill,  Can.  ij. 


CANON  VII. 

No  stranger  shall  be  received  without  letters  pacifical. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VII. 

A  traveller  having  no  letter  pacific  with  him  is 
not  to  be  received. 


Compare 
XXXIII. 


the   Apostolic    Canon    number 


For  a  discussion  of  the  Letters  styled  paci- 
fic!, see  notes  on  next  canon. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris  Can- 
onici, Gratian's  Deeretum,  Pars  I,  Dist.  had., 
c.  ix.  in  Isidore's  version.  The  Roman  Cor- 
rectors note  that  Dionysius  must  have  had  a 
different  reading  from  the  Greek  we  know. 


113 


ANTIOCII  IN  ENC^ENIIS.     A.D.  341 


CANON  VIII, 

Let  not  country  presbyters  give  letters  canonical,  or  let  tliem  send  sucli  letters  only 
to  the  neighbouring  bishops.  But  the  chorepiscopi  of  good  report  may  give  letters  paci- 
fical, 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  VIII. 
A  country  presbyter  is  not  to  give  canonical  let- 
ters, or\at  most]  onty  to  a  neighbouring  bishop. 

These  "  letters  canonical "  were  called  in 
the  West  letters  "formates"  and  no  greater 
proof  of  the  great  influence  they  had  in  the 
early  days  of  the  Church  in  binding  the  faith- 
ful together  can  be  found  than  the  fact  that 
Julian  the  Apostate  made  an  attempt  to  in- 
troduce something  similar  among  the  pagans 
of  his  empire. 

"Commendatory  letters"  (Ima-ToXal  crvara- 
tlkciI)  are  spoken  of  by  St.  Paul  in  2  Cor.  iii.  1, 
and  the  reader  will  find  some  interesting  re- 
marks on  this  and  cognate  subjects  in  J.  J. 
Blunt's,  The  Christian  Church  during  the  first 
three  Centuries  (Chapter  II). 

By  means  of  these  letters  even  the  lay  peo- 
ple found  hospitality  and  care  in  every  part 
of  the  world,  and  it  was  thrown  up  against  the 
Donatists  as  a  mark  of  their  being  schis- 
matics that  their  canonical  letters  were  good 
only  among  themselves. 

Pseudo-Isidore  informs  us  that  it  was 
stated  at  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  by  Atti- 
cus,  bishop  of  Constantinople,  that  it  was 
agreed  at  the  Council  of  Nice  that  all  such 
letters  should  be  marked  IT.  Y.  A.  IT.  (i.  e. 
Father,  Son,  Holy  Spirit),  and  it  is  asserted 
(Herzog,  Ileal-Encyh,  s.  v.  Literre  Formatse) 
that  this  form  is  found  in  German  documents 
of  the  sixth  century. 

As  will  be  seen  among  the  Canons  of  Chal- 
cedon, the  old  name,  Letters  Commendatory, 


is  continued,  but  in  this  canon  and  in  the 
41st  of  Laodicea  the  expression  "  Canonical 
Letters  "  is  used.  In  the  West,  at  least,  these 
letters  received  the  episcopal  seal  of  the  dio- 
cese to  avoid  all  possibility  of  imposture. 
Dean  Plumptre  (whom  I  am  following  very 
closely  in  this  note)  believes  the  earliest  evi- 
dence of  this  use  of  the  diocesan  seal  is  in  St. 
Augustine  (Fjpist.  lix.  al.  cexvij.)  He  also  re- 
fers to  Ducange,  s.  r.  Formatoe. 

As  these  letters  admitted  their  bearers 
to  communion  they  were  sometimes  called 
"Communion  letters"  (kouwikcu),  and  are  so 
described  by  St.  Cyril  of  Alexandria  ;  and  by 
the  Council  of  Elvira  (canon  xxv.),  and  by  St. 
Augustine  (Epist.  xliii.  al.  clxii). 

The  "  Letters  Pacifical "  appear  to  have 
been  of  an  eleemosynary  character,  so  that 
the  bearers  of  them  obtained  bodily  help. 
Chalcedon  in  its  eleventh  canon  ordains  that 

j  these  "Letters  pacifical " shall  be  given  to  the 
poor,  whether  they  be  clerics  or  laics.  The 
same  expression  is  used  in  the  preceding 
canon  of  the  synod. 

A  later  form  of  ecclesiastical  letter  is  that 
with  which  we  are  so  familiar,  the  "letter 
dimissory."  This  expression  first  occurs  in 
Canon  XVII.  of  the  Council  in  Trullo.  On 
this  expression  Suicer  (Thesaurus,  s.  r.  AttoXv- 
TiKrj)  draws  from  the  context  the  conclusion 
that  "letters  dimissory  "  were  given  only  for 
permanent  change  of  ecclesiastical  residence, 
while  "letters  commendatory  "  were  given  to 

j  those  whose  absence  from  their  diocese  was 

!  only  temporary. 


CANON  IX. 

It  behoves  the  bishops  in  every  province  to  acknowledge  the  bishop  who  presides  in 
the  metropolis,  and  who  has  to  take  thought  for  the  whole  province ;  because  all  men  of 
business  come  together  from  every  quarter  to  the  metropolis.  Wherefore  it  is  decreed 
that  he  have  precedence  in  rank,  and  that  the  other  bishops  do  nothing  extraordinary 
without  him,  (according  to  the  ancient  canon  which  prevailed  from  [the  times  of]  our 
Fathers)  or  such  things  only  as  pertain  to  their  own  particular  parishes  and  the  districts 
subject  to  them.  For  each  bishop  has  authority  over  his  own  parish,  both  to  manage  it 
with  the  piety  which  is  incumbent  on  every  one,  and  to  make  provision  for  the  whole 
district  which  is  dependent  on  his  city  ;  to  ordain  presbyters  and  deacons  ;  and  to  settle 
everything  with  judgment.  But  let  him  undertake  nothing  further  without  the  bishop 
of  the  metropolis  ;  neither  the  latter  without  the  consent  of  the  others. 


ANTIOCH  IN  ENCiENIIS.     A.D.  341 


113 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  IX. 
Bishops  should  be  bound  to  the  opinion  of  the 
metropolitan,  and  nothing  should  they  do  without 
his  knowledge  except  only  such  things  as  have  re- 
ference to  the  diocese  of  each,  and  let  them  ordain 
men  free  from  blame. 

Van  Espen. 

From  this  canon  we  see  that  causes  of 
more  importance  and  greater  moment  are  to 
be  considered  in  the  Provincial  Synod  which 
consisted  of  the  metropolitan  and  the  other 
bishops  of  the  province. 

By  the  "ancient  canon"  of  which  mention 
is  here  made,  there  can  scarcely  be  a  doubt 
is  intended  the  xxxiv.  of  the  Canons  of  the 
Apostles,  since  in  it  are  read  the  same  pro- 
visions (and  almost  in  the  same  words)  as 
here  are  set  forth  somewhat  more  at  length  ; 
nor  is  there  any  other  canon   in  which  these 


provisions  are  found  earlier  in  date  than  this 
synod,  wherefore  from  this  is  deduced  a 
strong  argument  for  the  integrity  of  the 
Canons  of  the  Apostles. 

The  wording  of  this  canon  should  be  com- 
pared with  the  famous  sentence  so  often 
quoted  of  St.  Irenteus.  "Ad  banc  enim  eccle- 
siam  [i.  e.  of  Rome]  propter  potentiorem 
principalitatem  necesse  est  omnem  convenire 
ecclesiam,  hoc  est,  eos  qui  sunt  undique  fi- 
deles,  in  qua  semper  ab  his,  qui  sunt  undi- 
que, conservata  est  eaque  est  ab  Apostolis 
traditio." 

Is  it  not  likely  that  in  the  lost  Greek  origi- 
nal the  words  translated  convenire  ad  were 
awrpix^v  iv  ?  Vide  on  the  meaning  of  con- 
venire ad,  F.  W.  Puller,  The  Primitive  Saints 
and  the  See  of  Borne,  pp.  32  ct  seqq. 

Compare  Apostolic  Canon  XXXIV. 


CANON  X. 

The  Holy  Synod  decrees  that  persons  in  villages  and  districts,  or  those  who  are 
called  chorepiscopi,  even  though  they  may  have  received  ordination  to  the  Episcopate, 
shall  regard  their  own  limits  and  manage  the  churches  subject  to  them,  and  be  content 
with  the  care  and  administration  of  these ;  but  they  may  ordain  readers,  sub-deacons 
and  exorcists,  and  shall  be  content  with  promoting  these,  but  shall  not  presume  to  or- 
dain either  a  presbyter  or  a  deacon,  without  the  consent  of  bishop  of  the  city  to  which 
he  and  his  district  are  subject.  And  if  he  shall  dare  to  transgress  [these]  decrees,  he 
shall  be  deposed  from  the  rank  which  he  enjoys.  And  a  chorepiscopus  is  to  be  ap- 
pointed by  the  bishop  of  the  city  to  which  he  is  subject. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  X. 


A  chorepiscopus  makes  Exorcists,  Lectors,  Sub- 
deacons  and  Singers,  but  not  a  presbyter  or  a  dea- 
con without  the  bishop)  of  the  city.  Who  dares  to 
transgress  this  laiv  let  him  be  deposed.  The 
bishop  of  the  city  mcikes  the  chorepiscopus. 

For  the  Minor  Orders  in  the  Early  Church 
see  the  Excursus  on  the  subject  appended  to 
Canon  XXIV.  of  Laodicea. 

"  Ordination  to  the  episcopate."  In  trans- 
lating thus  I  have  followed  both  Dionysius 
and  Isidore,  the  former  of  whom  translates 
"although  they  had  received  the  imposition 
of  the  hand  of  the  bishop  and  had  been  con- 
secrated bishops  ; "  and  the  latter  "  although 
they  had  received  from  bishops  the  imposition 
of  the  hand,  and  had  been  consecrated 
bishops." 

VOL.    XIV, 


Van  Espen. 


There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  Chorepis- 
copi, the  authority  of  whom  is  limited  by  this 
canon,  are  supposed  to  be  endowed  with  the 
episcopal  character.  Among  the  learned 
there  is  a  controversy  as  to  whether  Chore- 
piscopi were  true  bishops  by  virtue  of  the 
ordination  to  that  office,  and  endowed  with 
the  episcopal  character  or  were  only  bishops 
when  accidentally  so.  But  whatever  may  be 
the  merits  of  this  controversy,  there  can  be  no 
doubt  from  the  context  of  this  canon  that  the 
Fathers  of  Antiochtookit  for  granted  that  the 
chorepiscopi  were  true  bishops  by  virtue  of 
their  ordination,  but  it  is  also  evident  that 
they  were  subject  to  the  bishop  of  the  greater 
city.  It  must  also  be  noted  that  these  chore- 
piscopi were  not  instituted  by  the  canons  of 
the  Councils  of  Ancyra,  Neocsesarea,  or  even 
of  Nice,  for  these  speak  of  them  and  make 


1U 


ANTIOCII  IN  ENCVENIIS.     A.D.  341 


their  decrees  as  concerning  something  already 
existing, 

And  from  the  very  limitations  of  this  canon 
it  is  by  no  means  obscure  that  the  fathers  of 


Antioch  supposed  these  chorepiscopi  to  be 
real  bishops,  for  otherwise  even  -with  the 
license  of  the  bishop  of  _  the  city  they  could 
not  ordain  presbyters  or  deacons. 


CANON  XL 

If  any  bishop,  or  presbyter,  or  any  one  whatever  of  the  canon  shall  presume  to 
betake  himself  to  the  Emperor  without  the  consent  and  letters  of  the  bishop  of  the 
province,  and  particularly  of  the  bishop  of  the  metropolis,  such  a  one  shall  be  publicly 
deposed  and  cast  out,  not  only  from  communion,  but  also  from  the  rank  Avhich  he 
happens  to  have ;  inasmuch  as  he  dares  to  trouble  the  ears  of  our  Emperor  beloved  of 
God,  contrary  to  the  law  of  the  Church.  But,  if  necessary  business  shall  require  any 
one  to  go  to  the  Emperor,  let  him  do  it  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  metropolitan 
and  other  bishops  in  the  province,  and  let  him  undertake  his  journey  with  letters  from 
them. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XI. 


A  bishop  or  presbyter  ivho  of  liis  own  motion 
and  not  at  the  bidding  of  the  Metropolitan  of  the 
province  goes  to  the  Emperor  shad  be  dcprivcdboth 
of  communion  and  dignity. 

This  canon  is  one  of  those  magnificent 
efforts  which  the  early  church  made  to  check 
the  already  growing  inclination  to  what  we 
have  in  later  times  learned  to  call  Erastian- 
ism.  Not  only  did  the  State,  as  soon  as  it 
became  Christian,  interfere  in  spiritual  mat- 
ters at  its  own  motion,  but  there  were  found 
bishops  and  others  of  the  clergy  who  not 
being  able  to  attain  their  ends  otherwise, 


appealed  to  the  civil  power,  usually  to  the 
Emperor  himself,  and  thus  the  whole  disci- 
pline of  the  Church  was  threatened,  and  the 
authority  of  spiritual  synods  set  aside.  How 
unsuccessful  the  Church  often  was  in  this 
struggle  is  only  too  evident  from  the  remarks 
of  the  Greek  commentator  Balsamon  on  this 
very  canon. 

Hefele. 
Kellner  (Das  Buss,  tmd  Strafversahren,  p. 
61)  remarks  with  reference  to  this,  that  de- 
position is  here  treated  as  a  heavier  punish- 
ment than  exclusion  from  communion,  and 
therefore  the  latter  cannot  mean  actual 
excommunication  but  only  suspension. 


CANON   XII. 

If  any  presbyter  or  deacon  deposed  by  his  own  bishop,  or  any  bishop  deposed  by  a 
synod,  shall  dare  to  trouble  the  ears  of  the  Emperor,  when  it  is  his  duty  to  submit  his 
case  to  a  greater  synod  of  bishops,  and  to  refer  to  more  bishops  the  things  which  he 
thinks  right,  and  to  abide  by  the  examination  and  decision  made  by  them ;  if,  despising 
these,  he  shall  trouble  the  Emperor,  he  shall  be  entitled  to  no  pardon,  neither  shall  he 
have  an  opportunity  of  defence,  nor  any  hope  of  future  restoration. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XII. 
One   deposed,    if   he  shad   hare   troubled  the 
Emperor,  shall  seek  the  greater  synod,  and  sub- 
mit to  its  decree.     But  if  he  again  misbehave  him- 
self, he  shall  not  have  any  chance  of  restoration. 


and  it  was  used  against  St.  Chrysostom  by  his 
enemies.  Vide  Socrates,  Ecclesiastical  His- 
tory, Book  II,  Chapter  viij.,  and  Sozomen's 
Ecclesiastical  History,  Book  III.,  chapter  v.  ; 
also  ibid.  Book  VII. ,  chapter  xx. 


It  is  usually  supposed  that  this  canon,  as  ,  This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
well  as  the  fourth,  and  the  fourteenth  and  [  Canonici,  Gratian's  Decrctum,  Pars  II,  Causa 
fifteenth,  was  directed  against  St.  Athanasius,  I  XXL,  Quest.  V,  Can.  ij.,  in  Isidore's  Version. 


ANTIOCH   IN   ENC^ENIIS.     A.D.  341 


111 


CANON  XIII. 

No  bishop  shall  presume  to  pass  from  one  province  to  another,  and  ordain  persons 
to  the  dignity  of  the  ministry  in  the  Church,  not  even  should  he  have  others  with  him, 
unless  he  should  go  at  the  written  invitation  of  the  metropolitan  and  bishops  into  whose 
country  he  goes.  But  if  he  should,  without  invitation,  proceed  irregularly  to  the  ordina- 
tion of  any,  or  to  the  regulation  of  ecclesiastical  affairs  which  do  not  concern  him,  the 
things  done  by  him  are  null,  and  he  himself  shall  suffer  the  due  punishment  of  his  irregu- 
larity and  his  unreasonable  undertaking,  by  being  forthwith  deposed  by  the  holy  Synod. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XIII. 
If  without  invitation  a  bishop  shall  go  into  an- 
other province,  and  shall  ordain,  and  administer 
affairs,  what  he  docs  shall  be  void  and  he  himself 
shall  be  deposed. 

Compare  with  this  Apostolic  Canon  xxxv. ; 
also  canon  xxii.  of  this  same  synod. 


This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decrcfum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 
ix.,  Qusest.  II.,  Can.  vj.  in  the  Versio  Prisca. 
The  Roman  Correctors  are  not  satisfied  with 
it,  however,  nor  with  any  version  and  give  the 
Greek  text,  to  which  they  add  an  accurate 
translation. 


CANON  XIV. 

If  a  bishop  shall  be  tried  on  any  accusations,  and  it  should  then  happen  that  the 
bishops  of  the  province  disagree  concerning  him,  some  pronouncing  the  accused  inno- 
cent, and  others  guilty  ;  for  the  settlement  of  all  disputes,  the  holy  Synod  decrees  that 
the  metropolitan  call  on  some  others  belonging  to  the  neighbouring  province,  who  shall 
add  their  judgment  and  resolve  the  dispute,  and  thus,  with  those  of  the  province,  confirm 
what  is  determined. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XIV. 

If  the  bishops  of  the  province  disagree  among 
themselves  as  to  an  accused  bishop,  that  the  con- 
troversy may  be  certainly  settled,  let  other  neigh- 
bouring bishops  be  called  in. 

Zonakas. 

When  any  bishop  shall  have  been  con- 
demned with  unanimous  consent  by  all  the 
bishops  of  the  province,  the  condemnation  can- 
not be  called  into  doubt,  as  this  synod  has  set 
forth  in  its  fourth  canon.  But  if  all  the  bish- 
ops are  not  of  the  same  mind,  but  some  con- 
tend that  he  should  be  condemned  and  others 
the  contrary,  then  other  bishops  may  be  called 
in  by  the  metropolitan  from  the  neighbouring 
provinces,  and  when  their  votes  are  added  to 
one  or  other  of  the  parties  among  the  bishops, 
then  controversy  should  be  brought  to  a  close. 


This  also  is  the  law  of  the  Synod  of  Sardica, 
canons  iii.  and  v. 

Aristenus. 
Every  bishop  accused  of  crimes  should  be 
judged  by  his  own  synod,  but  if  the  bishops 
of  the  province  differ,  some  saying  that  he  is 
innocent  and  some  that  he  is  guilty,  the  metro- 
politan can  call  other  bishops  from  a  neigh- 
bouring province  that  they  may  solve  the 
controversy  agitated  by  the  bishops. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 
vi.,  Quasst.  iv.,  can.  j.  The  Roman  Correctors 
note  that  the  Latin  translation  implies  that 
the  neighbouring  metropolitan  is  to  be  in- 
vited and  say,  "But,  in  truth,  it  hardly  seems 
fitting  that  one  metropolitan  should  come  at 
the  call  of  another,  and  that  there  should  be 
two  metropolitans  in  one  synod," 


CANON  XV. 

If  any  bishop,  lying  under  any  accusation,  shall  be  judged  by  all  the  bishops  in  the 
province,  and  all  shall  unanimously  deliver  the  same  verdict  concerning  him,  he  shall 
not  be  again  judged  by  others,  but  the  unanimous  sentence  of  the  bishops  of  the  prov- 
ince shall  stand  firm. 

I   2 


116 


ANTIOCH  IN  ENCLENIIS.     A.D.  341 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XV. 


If  all  the  bishops  of  a  province  agree  with  regard 
to  a  bishop  already  sentenced,  a  new  trial  shall  not 
be  granted  him, 

Van  Espen. 
By  the  phrase  "by  others  "  must  be  under- 
stood bishops  called  from  a  neighbouring 
province,  of  which  mention  is  made  in  the 
previous  canon,  where  in  the  case  of  an  agree- 
ment among  the  bishops,  the  synod  did  not 
wish  to  be  called  in,  even  if  it  were  demanded 
by  the  condemned  bishop.  This  canon,  there- 
fore, is  a  supplement  as  it  were  to  the  preced- 
ing. And  for  this  reason  in  the  Breviarium 
and  in  Cresconius's  Collection  of  Canons  they 
are  placed  under  a  common  title,  cap.  144, 


"Concerning  the  difference  of  opinion  which 
happens  in  the  judgment  of  bishops,  or  when 
a  bishop  is  cut  off  by  all  the  bishops  of  his 
province." 

From  these  canons  it  is  manifest  that  at 
first  the  causes  of  bishops  were  agitated  and 
decided  in  provincial  synods,  and  this  disci- 
pline continued  for  many  centuries,  and  was 
little  by  little  departed  from  in  the  Vlllth 
and  IXth  centuries. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 
VI.,  Qusest.  IV.,  Can.  v.  Gratian  adds  a  note 
which  Van  Espen  remarks  smacks  of  his  own 
date  rather  than  of  that  of  the  Synod  of  An- 
tioch. 


CANON  XVI. 

If  any  bishop  without  a  see  shall  throw  himself  upon  a  vacant  church  and  seize  its 
throne,  without  a  full  synod,  he  shall  be  cast  out,  even  if  all  the  people  over  whom  he 
has  usurped  jurisdiction  should  choose  him.  And  that  shall  be  [accounted]  a  full  synod, 
in  which  the  metropolitan  is  present. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XVI.  j  cil  of  Chalcedon,  from  the  book  of  the  canons, 

_T„  .,,        .     .  ,,  ,       ,     .-,,      ,  ,,    I  in  which  this  is  called  the  95th  and  the  fol- 

•  Whoever  without  the  full  synod  and  without  the  lowiag  the  96th,  according  to  the  order  ob- 

Metrqpolitan  Conned,  shall  go  over  to  a  vacant  Sfirvfifl  -n  +llflt  hnolr  of  ihp  Railons. 

church,  even   if  he  has  no  position,  he  shall  be 


ejected.  This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 

Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
XCII.,  Can.  viij.  in  Isidore's  version,  and  the 
This,  together  with  the  following  canon,  j  Eoman  Correctors  note  its  departure  from  the 
was  recited  by  Bishop  Leontius  in  the  Coun- !  original. 


CANON  XVII. 

If  any  one  having  received  the  ordination  of  a  bishop,  and  having  been  appointed 
to  preside  over  a  people,  shall  not  accept  his  ministry,  and  will  not  be  persuaded  to  pro- 
ceed to  the  Church  entrusted  to  him,  he  shall  be  excommunicated  until  he,  being  con- 
strained, accept  it,  or  until  a  full  synod  of  the  bishops  of  the  province  shall  have  deter- 
mined concerning  him. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XVII. 
IVJioso  has  received  orders  and  abandoned 
them  let  him  be  excommunicated,  until  he  shall 
have  repented  and  been  received. 

Zonaeas. 
If  any  one  called  to  the  rule  of  the  people 
refuse  to  undertake  that  office  and  ministry, 


let  him  be  removed  from  communion,  that  is 
separated,  until  he  accept  the  position.  But 
should  he  persist  in  his  refusal,  he  can  by  no 
means  be  absolved  from  his  separation,  unless 
perchance  the  full  synod  shall  take  some  ac- 
tion in  his  case.  For  it  is  possible  that  he 
may  assign  reasonable  causes  why  he  should 
be  excused  from  accepting  the  prelature  of- 


ANTIOCH  IN  ENC^ENIIS.     A.D.  341 


117 


fered  him,  reasons  which  -would  meet  with 
the  approbation  of  the  synod. 

Balsamon  explains  the  canon  in  the  same 
sense  and  adds  that  by  "ordination"  here  is 
intended  ordination  proper,  not  merely  elec- 
tion, as  some  have  held. 


Compare  with  this  Apostolic  Canon 
XXXVI. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonic!,  Gratian's  Decrctum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
XCIL,  C.  vij.  The  Roman  Correctors  note 
that  Dionycius's  version  is  nearer  the  Greek. 


CANON  XVIII. 

If  any  bishop  ordained  to  a  parish  shall  not  proceed  to  the  parish  to  which  he  has 
been  ordained,  not  through  any  fault  of  his  own,  but  either  because  of  the  rejection 
of  the  people,  or  for  any  other  reason  not  arising  from  himself,  let  him  enjoy  his  rank 
and  ministry ;  only  he  shall  not  disturb  the  affairs  of  the  Church  which  he  joins ; 
and  he  shall  abide  by  whatever  the  full  synod  of  the  province  shall  determine,  after 
judging  the  case. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XVIII. 

Let  a  bishop  ordained  but  not  received  by  his 
city  have  his  part  of  the  honour,  and  offer  the 
liturgy  only,  waiting  for  the  synod  of  the  prov- 
ince to  give  judgment. 

Balsamon. 

In.  canon  xvij.  the  fathers  punished  him 
who  when  ordained  could  not  be  persuaded 
to  go  to  the  church  to  which  he  was  assigned. 
In  the  present  canon  they  grant  pardon  to 
him  who  is  willing  to  take  the  charge  of  the 
diocese,  for  which  he  was  consecrated,  but  is 
prevented  from  doing  so  by  the  impudence 
of  the  people  or  else  by  the  incursions  of  the 
infidel ;  and  therefore  they  allow  him  to 
enjoy,  in  whatever  province  he  may  happen 
to  be,   the  honour  due  his  rank,   viz.,   his 


throne,  his  title,  and  the  exercise  of  the 
episcopal  office,  with  the  knowledge  and  con- 
sent of  the  bishop  of  the  diocese.  He  must 
not,  however,  meddle  with  the  affairs  of  the 
church  of  which  he  is  a  guest,  that  is  to  say 
he  must  not  teach,  nor  ordain,  nor  perform 
any  episcopal  act  without  the  consent  of  the 
bishop  of  the  diocese ;  but  he  must  observe 
quiet,  until  he  learns  what  he  ought  to  do 
by  the  determination  of  the  full  Synod. 

Aristenus  explains  that  by  keeping  quiet  is 
intended  that  he  should  not  "use  any  military 
help  or  other  power. " 

This  canon  is  found  twice  in  the  Corpus 
Juris  Canonici,  Gratian's  Dec-return,  Pars  I., 
Dist.  xcii.,  c.  iv.  and  v.  ;  in  the  versions  of 
Martin  Bracarensis  and  of  Dionysius. 


CANON  XIX. 

A  bishop  shall  not  be  ordained  without  a  synod  and  the  presence  of  the  metropoli- 
tan of  the  province.  And  when  he  is  present,  it  is  by  all  means  better  that  all  his 
brethren  in  the  ministry  of  the  Province  should  assemble  together  with  him  ;  and  these 
the  metropolitan  ought  to  invite  by  letter.  And  it  were  better  that  all  should  meet ; 
but  if  this  be  difficult,  it  is  indispensable  that  a  majority  should  either  be  present  or 
take  part  by  letter  in  the  election,  and  that  thus  the  appointment  should  be  made  in 
the  presence,  or  with  the  consent,  of  the  majority ;  but  if  it  should  be  done  contrary  to 
these  decrees,  the  ordination  shall  be  of  no  force.  And  if  the  appointment  shall  be 
made  according  to  the  prescribed  canon,  and  any  should  object  through  natural  love  of 
contradiction,  the  decision  of  the  majority  shall  prevail. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XIX. 


If  there  be  no  synod  and  metropolitan,  let  there 


do  not  meet  together,  at  least  let  the  greater  number, 
or  let  them  give  their  assent  by  letter.  But  if 
after  the  a  fair  is  all  settled  afeto  are  contentious, 


be  no  bishop.    If  on  account  of  some  difficulty  all  I  let  the  vote  of  the  majority  stand  firm. 


118 


ANTIOCII  IN  ENaENIIS.     A.D.  341 


ZONARAS. 

In  tlie  first  place  it  must  be  noted  that  by 
"  ordination  "  in  this  place  is  meant  election, 
and  the  laying  on  of  the  bishop's  hand. 

Balsamon. 

The  method  of  choosing  a  bishop  is  laid 
down  in  the  canons  of  Nice,  number  iv.,  but 
the  present  canon  adds  the  provision  that  an 
election  -which  takes  place  in  violation  of  the 
provisions  of  this  decree  is  null  and  invalid  : 
and  that  when  those  who  are  electing  are 
divided  in  opinion  as  to  whom  to  choose,  the 
votes   of  the   majority   shall  prevail.       But 


when  you  hear  this  canon  saying  that  there 
should  be  no  election  without  the  presence  of 
the  Metropolitan,  you  must  not  say  that  he 
ought  to  be  present  at  an  election  (for  this 
was  prohibited,  as  is  found  written  in  other 
canons)  but  rather  say  that  his  presence  here 
is  a  permission  or  persuasion,  without  which 
no  election  could  take  place. 

Compare  Apostolic  Canon  number  j. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Lccrctum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
LXV.,  can.  iij.  Gratian  has  chosen  Isidore's 
version,  and  the  Roman  Correctors  point  out 
that  Dionysius'  is  preferable. 


CANON  XX. 

With  a  view  to  the  good  of  the  Church  and  the  settlement  of  disputes,  it  is  decreed 
to  be  well  that  synods  of  the  bishops,  (of  which  the  metropolitan  shall  give  notice  to 
the  provincials),  should  be  held  in  every  province  twice  a  year,  one  after  the  third  week 
of  the  feast  of  Easter,  so  that  the  synod  may  be  ended  in  the  fourth  week  of  the  Pen- 
tecost ;  and  the  second  on  the  ides  of  October  which  is  the  tenth  [or  fifteenth]  day  of 
the  month  Hyperberetseus ;  so  that  presbyters  and  deacons,  and  all  who  think  them- 
selves unjustly  dealt  with,  may  resort  to  these  synods  and  obtain  the  judgment  of  the 
synod.  But  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  to  hold  synods  by  themselves  without  those 
who  are  entrusted  with  the  Metropolitan  Sees. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  or  Canon  XX. 

On  account  of  ecclesiastical  necessities  the  synod 
in  every  province  shall  meet  twice  a  year,  in  the 
fourth  week  of  Pentecost  and  on  the  tenth  day  of 
Hypcrbcrctceus. 

ScHELESTEATius  (tit  Van  Espen). 

The  time  fixed  bj*  the  Council  of  Nice  be- 
fore Lent  for  the  meeting  of  the  synod  was 
not  received  in  the  East,  and  the  bishops  kept 
on  in  the  old  custom  of  celebrating  the  coun- 
cil in  the  fourth  week  after  Easter,  for  the 
time  before  Lent  often  presented  the  great- 
est difficulties  for  those  in  the  far  separated 
cities  to  come  to  the  provincial  metropolis. 

Van  Espen. 

In  this  canon  the  decree  of  Nice  in  canon 
v.  is  renewed,  but  with  this  difference  that 
the  Nicene  synod  orders  one  synod  to  be  held 


before  Lent,  but  this  synod  that  it  should  be 
held  the  fourth  week  after  Easter. 

It  will  be  remembered  that  the  whole  pe- 
riod of  the  great  fifty  days  from  Easter  to 
"Whitsunday  was  known  as  "Pentecost." 

Compare  with  this  Apostolic  Canon  number 
XXXVII. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Dccrctum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
XVIIL,  c.  xv.,  attributed  to  a  council  held  by 
Pope  Martin.  The  Boman  Correctors  point 
out  that  this  "Pope  Martin"  was  a  bishop  of 
Braga  (Bracarcnsis)  from  whose  collection  of 
the  decrees  of  the  Greek  synods  Gratian 
often  quotes  ;  the  Correctors  also  note,  "  For 
bishops  in  old  times  were  usually  called 
Popes"  (Antiquitus  enim  episcopi  Papce  dice- 
bantu r). 


CANON  XXI. 

A  bishop  may  not  be  translated  from  one  parish  to  another,  either  intruding  himself 
of  his  own  suggestion,  or  under  compulsion  by  the  people,  or  by  constraint  of  the 
bishops  ;  but  he  shall  remain  in  the  Church  to  which  he  was  allotted  by  God  from  the 


ANTIOCII  IN  ENC/ENILS.     A.D.  341 


119 


beginning,  and  shall  not  be  translated  from  it,  according  to  the  decree  formerly  passed 
on  the  subject. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXI. 
A  bishop  even  if  compelled  by  the  people,  and 
compelled  by  the  bishops,  must  not  be  translated  to 
another  diocese. 

See   the   treatment  of   the   translation  of 
bishops  in  the  Excursus  to  canon  xv.  of  Nice. 


Compare  this  canon  with  Apostolical  Can- 
on number  xiv. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Dccretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 
VII.,  Qusest.  I.,  can.  xxv.,  from  Isidore's  ver- 
sion. 


CANON  XXII. 

Let  not  a  bishop  go  to  a  strange  city,  which  is  not  subject  to  himself,  nor  into  a  dis- 
trict which  does  not  belong  to  him,  either  to  ordain  any  one,  or  to  appoint  presbyters  or 
deacons  to  places  within  the  jurisdiction  of  another  bishop,  unless  with  the  consent  of 
the  proper  bishop  of  the  place.  And  if  any  one  shall  presume  to  do  any  such  thing,  the 
ordination  shall  be  void,  and  he  himself  shall  be  punished  by  the  synod. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  or  Canon  XXII. 


A  bishop  shall  not  go  from  city  to  city  ordain- 
ing people,  except  by  the  will  of  the  bishop  of  the 
city:  otherwise  the  ordination  shall  be  without 
force,  and  he  himself  exposed  to  censure. 

If  we  do  not  draw  a  rash  conclusion,  we 
should  say  that  the  interference  of  bishops  in 
dioceses  not  their  own,  must  have  been  very 
frequent  in  early  days.  This  one  synod  en- 
acted two  canons  (number  XIII.  and  this 
present  canon)  on  the  subject.  The  same 
prohibition  is  found  in  canons  XIV.  and 
XXXV.  of  the  Apostolic  canons,  in  canon  XV. 
of  Nice,  canon  ij.  of  I.  Constantinople  and  in 
many  others.  On  account  of  the  similarity 
of  this  canon  to  canon  xiii.  some  have  sup- 
posed it  to  be  spurious,  the  enactment  of 
some  other  synod,  and  this  was  the  opinion 
of  Godefrides  Hermantius  (Vita  S.  Athana- 
sii,  Lib.  IV.,  cap.  xij.)  as  well  as  of  Alexander 
Natalis  (Hist.  Scec,  IV.,  Dissert,  xxv.).  Van 
Espen,  however,  is  of  opinion  that  the  two 
canons  do  not  cover  exactly  the  same  ground, 


for  he  says  Canon  XIII.  requires  letters  both 
from  the  Metropolitan  and  from  the  other 
bishops  of  the  province,  while  this  canon 
XXII.  requires  only  the  consent  of  the  dioce- 
san. He  concludes  that  Canon  XIII.  refers 
to  a  diocese  scde  vacante,  when  the  Metropoli- 
tan with  the  other  bishops  took  care  of  the 
widowed  church,  but  that  Canon  XXII.  refers 
to  a  diocese  with  its  own  bishop,  whose  will 
is  all  that  is  needed  for  the  performance  of 
episcopal  acts  by  another  bishop.  And  this 
distinction  Schelestratius  makes  still  more 
evident  by  his  discussion  of  the  matter  in  his 
scholion  on  Canon  XIII. 

Compare  with  this  canon  of  the  Apostolic 
Canons  number  XXXV.  also  number  XIV. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Dccretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 
IX.,  Qusest.  II.,  can.  vij.,  butin  a  form  differ- 
ing far  from  the  Greek  original,  as  the  Roman 
Correctors  point  out ;  and  even  Gratian's 
present  text  is  not  as  he  wrote  it,  but  amended. 


CANON  XXIII. 

It  shall  not  be  laAvful  for  a  bishop,  even  at  the  close  of  life,  to  appoint  another  as 
successor  to  himself ;  and  if  any  such  thing  should  be  done,  the  appointment  shall  be 
void.  But  the  ecclesiastical  law  must  be  observed,  that  a  bishop  must  not  be  appointed 
otherwise  than  by  a  synod  and  with  the  judgment  of  the  bishops,  who  have  the  authority 
to  promote  the  man  who  is  worthy,  after  the  falling  asleep  of  him  who  has  ceased  from 
his  labours.'' 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXIII.  Nothing  could  be  more  important  than  the 

A  dying  bishop  shall  not  appoint  another  bishop,    provision  of  this  canon.     It  is  evidently  in- 

But  when  he  is  dead  a  worthy  successor  shall  be   tended  to  prevent  nepotism  in  every  form, 

provided  by  a  synod  of  those  who  have  this  poiver.  |  and  to  leave  the  appointment  to  the  vacant 


1:30 


ANTIOOH  IN   ENC2ENIIS.     A.D.  341 


see  absolutely  to  the  free  choice  of  the  Metro- 
politan and  his  synod.  The  history  of  the 
Church,  and  its  present  practice,  is  a  curious 
commentary  upon  the  ancient  legislation,  and 
the  appointment  of  coadjutor  bishops  cum  jure 
succcssionis,  so  common  in  later  days,  seems  to 
be  a  somewhat  ingenious  way  of  escaping  the 
force  of  the  canon.  Van  Espen,  however,  re- 
minds his  readers  of  the  most  interesting  case 
of  St.  Augustine  of  Hippo  (which  he  himself 
narrates  in  his  Epistle  CCXIII.)  of  how  he 
was  chosen  by  his  predecessor  as  bishop  of 
Hippo,  both  he  and  the  then  bishop  being  ig- 
norant of  the  fact  that  it  was  prohibited  by 
the  canons.  And  how  when  in  his  old  age 
the  people  wished  him  to  have  one  chosen 
bishop  to  help  him  till  his  death  and  to  suc- 
ceed him  afterwards,  he  declined  saying: 
"What  was  worthy  of  blame  in  my  own  case, 
shall  not  be  a  blot  likewise  upon  my  son." 
He  did  not  hesitate  to  say  who  he  thought 


most  worthy  to  succeed  him,  but  he  added, 
"he  shall  be  a  presbyter,  as  he  is,  and  when 
God  so  wills  he  shall  be  a  bishop."     Van  Es- 
I  pen  adds  ;  "All  this  should  be  read  carefully 
!  that  thence  may  be  learned  how  St.  Augustine 
i  set  an  example  to  bishops  and  pastors  of  tak- 
ing all   the   pains  possible  that  after  their 
j  deaths   true   pastors,   and  not    thieves    and 
wolves,  should  enter  into  their  flocks,  who  in  a 
j  short  time  would  destroy  all  they  had  accom- 
plished by  so  much  labour  in  so  long  a  time." 
(Cf.  Eusebius.     H.  E.,  Lib.  VI.,  cap.  xj.  and 
cap.  xxxij.) 

Compare  Apostolic  Canon  number  LXXVI. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the   Corpus  Juris 

Canonici,  Gratian's  Becretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 

j  VIII.,  Qu^est.  I.,  can.  III.,  in  Dionysius's  ver- 

I  sion,  and  again  Canon  IV.  in  that  of  Martin 

:  Bracarensis. 


CANON  XXIV. 

It  is  right  that  what  belongs  to  the  Church  be  preserved  with  all  care  to  the  Church, 
with  a  good  conscience  and  faith  in  God,  the  inspector  and  judge  of  all.  And  these 
things  ought  to  be  administered  under  the  judgment  and  authority  of  the  bishop,  who 
is  entrusted  with  the  whole  people  and  with  the  souls  of  the  congregation.  But  it 
should  be  manifest  what  is  church  property,  with  the  knowledge  of  the  presbyters  and 
deacons  about  him  ;  so  that  these  may  know  assuredly  what  things  belong  to  the 
Church,  and  that  nothing  be  concealed  from  them,  in  order  that,  when  the  bishop  may 
happen  to  depart  this  life,  the  property  belonging  to  the  Church  being  well  known,  may 
not  be  embezzled  nor  lost,  and  in  order  that  the  private  property  of  the  bishop  may 
not  be  disturbed  on  a  pretence  that  it  is  part  of  the  ecclesiastical  goods.  For  it  is  just 
and  well-pleasing  to  God  and  man  that  the  private  property  of  the  bishop  be  be- 
queathed to  whomsoever  he  will,  but  that  for  the  Church  be  kept  whatever  belongs  to 
the  Church  ;  so  that  neither  the  Church  may  suffer  loss,  nor  the  bishop  be  injured  un- 
der pretext  of  the  Church's  interest,  nor  those  who  belong  to  him  fall  into  lawsuits,  and 
himself,  after  his  death,  be  brought  under  reproach. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXIV. 


All  the  clergy  should  be  cognizant  of  ecclesias- 
tical matters ;  so  that  ivhcn  the  bishop  dies  the 
Church  mag  preserve  her  own  goods;  but  ichat 
belongs  to  the  bishop  shall  be  disposed  of  according 
to  his  directions. 

Van  Espen. 

This  canon  shews  the  early  discipline  ac- 
cording to  which  the  presbyters  and  deacons 
of  the  episcopal  city,  who  were  said  to  be 
"about  him "  or  to  pertain  to  his  chair,  rep- 
resented the  senate  of  the  church,  who  to- 
gether with  the  bishop  administered  the 
church  affairs,  and,  when  the  see  was  vacant, 


had  the  charge  of  it.  All  this  Martin  of  Braga 
sets  forth  more  clearly  in  his  version,  and 
I  have  treated  of  the  matter  at  large  in  my 
work  on  Ecclesiastical  Law,  Pars  I.,  Tit.  viii., 
cap.  i.,  where  I  have  shewn  that  the  Cathe- 
dral chapter  succeeded  to  this  senate  of  pres- 
byters and  deacons. 

Compare  with  this  canon  Apostolical  Can- 
on XL. 

This  canon  in  a  somewhat  changed  form  is 
found  in  the  Corpus  Juris  Canonici,  Gratian's 
Dccrctum,  Pars  II.,  Causa  XII.,  Qua?st.  I., 
can.  xx.,  and  attributed  to  "Pope  Martin's 
Council "  ;  also  compare  with  this  the  ensu- 
ing canon,  number  XXI. 


ANTIOCH  IN  ENCiENIIS.     A.D.  341 


121 


CANON  XXV. 

Let  the  bishop  have  power  over  the  funds  of  the  Church,  so  as  to  dispense  them 
with  all  piety  and  in  the  fear  of  God  to  all  who  need.  And  if  there  be  occasion,  let  him 
take  "what  he  requires  for  his  own  necessary  uses  and  those  of  his  brethren  sojourning 
with  him,  so  that  they  may  in  no  way  lack,  according  to  the  divine  Apostle,  who  says, 
"  Having  food  and  raiment,  let  us  therewith  be  content."  And  if  he  shall  not  be  con- 
tent with  these,  but  shall  apply  the  funds  to  his  own  private  uses,  and  not  manage  the 
revenues  of  the  Church,  or  the  rent  of  the  farms,  with  the  consent  of  the  presbyters  and 
deacons,  but  shall  give  the  authority  to  his  own  domestics  and  kinsmen,  or  brothers,  Ol- 
sons, so  that  the  accounts  of  the  Church  are  secretly  injured,  he  himself  shall  submit 
to  an  investigation  by  the  synod  of  the  province.  But  if,  on  the  other  hand,  the  bishop 
or  his  presbyters  shall  be  defamed  as  appropriating  to  themselves  what  belongs  to  the 
Church,  (whether  from  lands  or  any  other  ecclesiastical  resources),  so  that  the  poor  are 
oppressed,  and  accusation  and  infamy  are  brought  upon  the  account  and  on  those  who 
so  administer  it,  let  them  also  be  subject  to  correction,  the  holy  synod  determining  what 
is  right. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXV. 

The  bishop  shall  have  power  over  ecclesiastical 
goods.  Bid  should  he  not  be  content  ivith  those 
things  ivhicli  are  sufficient  for  him  but  shall 
alienate  the  goods  and  revenues  of  the  church, 
without  the  advice  of  the  clergy,  penalties  shall  be 
exacted  from  him  in  the  presence  of  the  synod. 
But  if  he  has  converted  to  his  oim  uses  ivhativas 
given  for  the  poor,  of  this  also  let  him  give  cm  ex- 
planation to  the  synod. 

Compare  with  this  canon  Apostolic  Canon 
number  XLI. 

This  Canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  JDecretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 
XII.,  Qusest  I.,    can.    XXIII.    and  with  this 


should  be  compared  canon  XXII.  immediately 
preceding. 

At  the  end  of  this  canon  in  Labbe's  ver- 
sion of  Dionysius  we  find,  these  words  added. 
"And  thirty  bishops  signed  who  were  gath- 
ered together  at  this  Synod."  Isidore  Mer- 
cator  has  a  still  fuller  text,  viz. :  "I,  Eusebius, 
being  present  subscribe  to  all  things  consti- 
tuted by  this  holy  Synod.  Theodore,  Nicetas, 
Macedonius,  Anatolius,  Tarcodimantus,  Mt\\e- 
reus,  Narcissus,  Eustachius,  Hesychius,  Mau- 
ricius,  Paulus,  and  the  rest,  thirty  bishops 
agreed  and  signed."  Van  Espen  after  noting 
that  this  addition  is  not  found  in  the  Greek, 
nor  in  Martin  Bracarensis,  adds  "  there  is 
little  probability  that  this  clause  is  of  the 
same  antiquity  as  the  canons." 


SYNOD  OF  LAOBICEA. 


A.D.  343-381. 


Elenclais. 


Historical   Introduction. 

The  Canons  with  the  Ancient  Epitome  and 
Notes. 

Excursus  to  Canon  XVIII. ,  On  the  Choir 
Offices  of  the  Early  Church. 


Excursus  to  Canon  XIX.,  On  the  Worship 
of  the  Early  Church. 

Excursus  to  Canon  XXII,  On  the  Vest- 
ments of  the  Early  Church. 

Excursus  to  Canon  XXIV.,  On  the  Minor 
Orders  in  the  Early  Church. 


HISTORICAL  INTRODUCTION. 

The  Laodicea  at  which,  the  Synod  met  is  Laodicea  in  Phrygia  Pacatiana,  also  called  Lao- 
dicea  ad  Lycuni,  and  to  be  carefully  distinguished  from  the  Laodicea  in  Syria.  This  much 
is  certain,  but  as  to  the  exact  date  of  the  Synod  there  is  much  discussion.  Peter  de  Marca 
fixed  it  at  the  year  365,  but  Pagi  in  his  Critica  on  Baronius's  Annals  :  seems  to  have  over- 
thrown the  arguments  upon  which  de  Marca  rested,  and  agrees  with  Gothofred  in  placing  it 
circa  363.  At  first  sight  it  would  seem  that  the  Seventh  Canon  gave  a  clue  which  would  set- 
tle the  date,  inasmuch  as  the  Photinians  are  mentioned,  and  Bishop  Photinus  began  to  be 
prominent  in  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century  and  was  anathematized  by  the  Eusebians  in  a 
synod  at  Antioch  in  344,  and  by  the  orthodox  at  Milan  in  345  ;  and  finally,  after  several 
other  condemnations,  he  died  in  banishment  in  366.  But  it  is  not  quite  certain  whether  the 
word  "Photinians  "  is  not  an  interpolation.  Something  with  regard  to  the  date  may  perhaps 
be  drawn  from  the  word  TLa.K.o.Tiavris  as  descriptive  of  Phrygia,  for  it  is  probable  that  this 
division  was  not  yet  made  at  the  time  of  the  Sardican  Council  in  343.  Hefele  concludes 
that  "  Under  such  circumstances,  it  is  best,  with  Remi  Ceillier,  Tillemont,  and  others,  to 
place  the  meeting  of  the  synod  of  Laodicea  generally  somewhere  between  the  years  343  and 
381,  i.e.,  between  the  Sardican  and  the  Second  Ecumenical  Council — and  to  give  up  the  at- 
tempt to  discover  a  more  exact  date." 2 

But  since  the  traditional  position  of  the  canons  of  this  Council  is  after  those  of  Antioch 
and  immediately  before  those  of  First  Constantinople,  I  have  followed  this  order.  Such  is 
their  position  in  "  very  many  old  collections  of  the  Councils  which  have  had  their  origin 
since  the  sixth  or  even  in  the  fifth  century,"  says  Hefele.  It  is  true  that  Matthew  Blastares 
places  these  canons  after  those  of  Sardica,  but  the  Quinisext  Synod  in  its  Second  Canon  and 
Pope  Leo  IV.,  according  to  the  Corpus  Juris  Canonici,3  give  them  the  position  which  they 
hold  in  this  volume. 


1  Pagi :  Crit.  in  Anna!.  Baron.,  a.d.  314,  n.  xsv.  Baronius's 
view  that  this  synod  was  held  before  that  of  Nice  because  the 
book  of  Judith  is  not  mentioned  among  the  books  of  the  O.  T., 
and  because  its  canons  are  sometimes  identical  with  those  or 
Nice,  is  universally  rejected. 


2  Hefele  :  Hist,  of  the  Councils,  Vol.  II.,  p.  298. 

3  Gratian  :  Decretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist.  xx,,  c.  1.    It  is  from  Leo's 
letter  to  the  British  Bishops. 


THE  CANONS  OF  THE  SYNOD  HELD  IN  THE  CITY  OF 
LAODICEA,  IN  PHRYGIA  PACATIANA,  IN  WHICH  MANY 
BLESSED  FATHERS  FROM  DIVERS  PROVINCES  OF  ASIA 
WERE   GATHERED  TOGETHER.1 


The  holy  synod  which  assembled  at  Laodicea  in  Phrygia  Pacatiana,  from  divers 
regions  of  Asia ;  set  forth  the  ecclesiastical  definitions  which  are  hereunder  annexed. 


NOTE. 


This  brief  preface,  by  some   ancient  col 


lector,  is  found  in  the   printed    editions  of  Amerbachian  manuscript 


Zonaras  and  of   Balsamon  and   also   in    the 


CANON  I. 

It  is  right,  according  to  the  ecclesiastical  Canon,  that  the  Communion  should  by 
indulgence  be  given  to  those  who  have  freely  and  lawfully  joined  in  second  marriages, 
not  having  previously  made  a  secret  marriage ;  after  a  short  space,  which  is  to  be  spent 
by  them  in  prayer  and  fasting. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  I. 

A  digamist  not  secretly  married,  after  devot- 
ing himself  for  a  short  time  to  praying  shall  be 
held  blameless  afterwards. 

Van  Espen. 

Many  synods  imposed  a  penance  upon 
digamists,  although  the  Church  never  con- 
demned second  marriages. 

On  this  whole  subject  of  second  marriages 
see  notes  on  Canon  VIII.  of  Nice,  on  Canons 
III.  and  VII.  of  Neocaesarea,  and  on  Canon 
XIX.  of  Ancyra.  In  treating  of  this  canon 
Hefele  does  little  but  follow  Van  Espen,  who 
accepts  Bishop  Beveridge's  conclusions  in 
opposition  to  Justellus  and  refers  to  him,  as 
follows,  "See  this  observation  of  Justellus' 
refuted  more  at  length  by  William  Beveridge 


in  his  notes  on  this  canon,"  and  Bj).  Beve- 
ridge adopted  and  defended  the  exposition  of 
the  Greek  commentators,  viz. :  there  is  some 
fault  and  some  punishment,  they  are  to  be 
held  back  from  communion  for  "a  short 
space,"  but  after  that,  it  is  according  to  the 
law  of  the  Church  that  they  should  be  admitted 
to  communion.  The  phrase  "not  having 
previously  made  a  secret  marriage "  means 
that  there  must  not  have  been  intercourse 
with  the  woman  before  the  second  marriage 
was  "  lawfully  "  contracted,  for  if  so  the  pun- 
ishment would  have  been  for  fornication,  and 
neither  light  nor  for  "a  short  space."  The 
person  referred  to  in  the  canon  is  a  real  diga- 
mist and  not  a  bigamist,  this  is  proved  by  the 
word  "  lawfully  "  which  could  not  be  used  of 
the  second  marriage  of  a  man  who  already 
bad  a  living  wife. 


CANON  II. 

They  who  have  sinned  in  divers  particulars,  if  they  have  persevered  in  the  prayer 
of  confession  and  penance,  and  are  wholly  converted  from  their  faults,  shall  be  received 
again  to  communion,  through  the  mercy  and  goodness  of  God,  after  a  time  of  penance 
appointed  to  them,  in  proportion  to  the  nature  of  their  offence. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  II.  |  the  penance  suitable  to  them,  shall  be  favourably 

Those  who  have  fallen  into  various  faults  and.  received. 
have  confessed  them  with  compunction,  and  done  \ 


1  Such  is  the  caption  in  the  Parisian  edition  of  Zonaras ;  so  |  number   of    canons  is  60,  and   substituting  for  "Pacatiana' 
too  reads  the  Amerbachian  codex;  adding,  however,  that  the  j  "Capatiana,"  a  not  unusual  form  of  the  same  word. 


120 


SYNOD   OP  LAODIOEA.    A.D.  343-381 


Hefele. 
Van  Espen  and  others  were  of  opinion 
that  this  canon  treated  only  of  those  who  had 
themselves  been  g'uilty  of  various  criminal 
acts,  and  it  has  been  asked  whether  any  one 
guilty  not  only  of  one  gross  sin,  but  of 
several  of  various  kinds,  might  also  be  again 
received  into  communion.  It  seems. to  me, 
however,  that  this  canon  with  the  words, 
"those  who  have  sinned  in  divers  particu- 
lars," simply  means  that  "  sinners  of  various 
kinds  shall  be  treated  exactly  in  proportion 
to  the  extent  of  their  fall."  That  the  ques- 
tion is  not  necessarily  of  different  sins  com- 
mitted by  the  same  person  appears  from  the 
words,  "in  proportion  to  the  nature  of  their 


offence,"  as  the  singular,  not  the   plural,  is 
here  used. 

But  Van  Espen,  with  Aubespine,  is  clearly 
right  in  not  referring  the  words,  "if  they 
persevere  in  confession  and  repentance,"  to 
sacramental  confession,  to  which  the  expres- 
sion "  persevere  "  would  not  be  well  suited. 
Here  is  evidently  meant  the  oft-repeated  con- 
trite confession  before  God  and  the  congre- 
gation in  prayer  of  sins  committed,  which 
preceded  sacramental  confession  and  absolu- 
tion. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Ganonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 
XXVI.,  Quest,  vii.,  can.  iv. 


CANON  III. 

He  who  has  been  recently  baptized  ought  not  to  be  promoted  to  the  sacerdotal  order. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  III. 
A  ncophite  is  not  ordainabJc. 


light,  Nectarius,  just  separated  from  the  flock 
of  the  catechumens,  when  he  had  washed  away 
t  the  sins  of  his  life  in  the  divine  font,  now 
This  rule  is  laid  down  in  the  Second  Nicene  j  pure  himself,  he  put  on  the  most  pure  dig- 
canon.     Balsamon   also   compares  Apostolic   nity  of  the  episcopate,  and  at  the  same  time 


Canon  lxxx, 

Balsamon. 

Notwithstanding  this  provision,  that  great 


became  bishop  of  the  Imperial  City,  and 
president  of  the  Second  Holy  Ecumenical 
Synod. 


CANON  IV. 

They  who  are  of  the  sacerdotal  order  ought  not  to  lend  and  receive  usury,  nor  what 
is  called  hemiolire. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  IV. 
A  priest  is  not  to  receive  usury  nor  hcmiolice. 

The  same  rule  is  laid  down  in  the  seven- 
teenth Canon  of  Nice.     For  a  treatment  of 


Dionysius  Exiguus  and  Isidore  have  num- 
bered this  canon  v.,  and  our  fifth  they  have  as 
iv. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 


the  whole  subject  of  usury  see  excursus  to  j  Canonici,  Gratian's   Decretum,   Pars   I.,  Dist. 
that  canon.  I  XLVL,  can.  ix. 


CANON  V. 

Ordinations  are  not  to  be  held  in  the  presence  of  hearers. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  V. 


Ordinations  are  not  to  be  performed  in   tlic 
presence  of  hearers. 


Balsamon. 


This  canon  calls  elections  "laying  on  of 
hands,"  and  says  that  since  in  elections  un- 


SYNOD   OF   LAODICEA.     A.D.  343-381 


127 


worthy  things  are  often  said  with  regard  to 
those  who  are  elected,  therefore  they  should 
not  take  place  in  the  presence  of  any  that 
might  happen  to  come  to  hear. 

Zonaras  also  agrees  that  election  is  here 
intended,  but  Aristenus  dissents  and  makes 


the    reference    to 
called,  as  follows  : 


ordinations    properly    so- 


Aeistenus. 

The  prayers  of  ordination  are  not  to  be  said 
out  loud  so  that  they  may  be  heard  by  the 
people. 


CANON  VI. 

It  is  not  permitted  to  heretics  to  enter  the  house  of  God  while  they  continue  in 

heresy. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VI. 
The  holy  place  is  forbidden  to  heretics. 

Aeistenus. 

Heretics  are  not  to  be  permitted  to  enter 
the  house  of  God,  and  yet  Basil  the  Great, 
before  this  canon  was  set  forth,  admitted 
Valens  to  the  perfecting  of  the  faithful  [i.e., 
to  the  witnessing  the  celebration  of  the  Divine 
Mysteries]. 

Van  Espen. 

A  heretic  who  pertinaciously  rejects  the 
doctrine  of  the  Church  is  rightly  not  allowed 


to  enter  the  house  of  God,  in  which  his  doc- 
trine is  set  forth,  so  long  as  he  continues  in 
his  heresy.  For  this  reason  when  Timothy, 
Archbishop  of  Alexandria,  was  consulted  con- 
cerning the  admission  of  heretics  to  church, 
answered  in  the  IXth  Canon  of  his  Canonical 
Epistle,  that  unless  they  were  ready  to  promise 
to  do  penance  and  to  abandon  their  heresy, 
they  could  in  no  way  be  admitted  to  the 
prayers  of  the  faithful. 

Contrast  with  this  Canon  lxxxiv.,  of  the  so- 
called  IVth  Council  of  Carthage,  a,d.  398, 


CANON  VII. 

PERSONS  converted  from  heresies,  that  is,  of  the  Novatians,  Photinians,  and  Quarto- 
decimans,  whether  they  were  catechumens  or  communicants  among  them,  shall  not  be 
received  until  they  shall  have  anathematized  every  heresy,  and  particularly  that  in  which 
they  were  held ;  and  afterwards  those  who  among  them  were  called  communicants,  hav- 
ing thoroughly  learned  the  symbols  of  the  faith,  and  having  been  anointed  with  the 
holy  chrism,  shall  so  communicate  in  the  holy  Mysteries. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VII. 


Novatians  and  Photinians,  and  Quartodeci- 
mans,  unless  they  anathemalMse  their  own  and 
other  heresies,  are  not  to  be  received.  When 
they  have  been  anointed,  after  their  abjuration, 
let  them  communicate. 

I  have  allowed  the  word  "  Photinians  "  to 
stand  in  the  text  although  whether  it  is  not  an 
interpolation  is  by  no  means  certain.  They 
certainly  were  heretical  on  the  doctrine  of  the 
Holy  Trinity,  and  therefore  differed  from  the 
other  dissidents  mentioned  in  the  canon,  all 
of  whom  were  orthodox  on  this  matter.  It  is 
also  worthy  of  note  that  the  word  is  not  found 
in  Ferrandus's  Condensation  (Breriatio  Cano- 
ninn,  n.  177)  nor  in  Isidore's  version.  More- 
over there  is  a  Latin  codex  in  Lucca,  and  also 


one  in  Paris  (as  is  noted  by  Mansi,  v.  585  ;  ij. 
591)  in  which  it  is  lacking.  It  was  rejected 
by  Baronius,  Binius,  and  Bemi  Ceillier. 

The  word  "  Catechumens  "  is  wanting  in 
many  Greek  MSS.  but  found  in  Balsamon, 
moreover,  Dionysius  and  Isidore  had  it  in  their 
texts. 

This  canon  possesses  a  great  interest  and 
value  to  the  student  from  a  different  point  of 
view.  Its  provisions,  both  doctrinal  and  dis- 
ciplinary, are  in  contrariety  with  the  provis- 
ions of  the  council  held  at  Carthage  in  the 
time  of  St.  Cyprian,  and  yet  both  these  canons, 
contradictory  as  they  are,  are  accepted  by  the 
Council  in  Trullo  and  are  given  such  ecumeni- 
cal authority  as  canons  on  discipline  ever  can 
possess,  by  the  Seventh  Ecumenical.  This  is  not 


128 


SYNOD   OF   LAODICEA.     A.D.  343-381 


the  only  matter  in  which  the  various  conciliar 
actions  adopted  and  ratified  do  not  agree  inter 
se,  and  from  this  consideration  it  would  seem 
evident  that  it  was  not  intended  that  to  each 
particular  of  each  canon  of  each  local  synod 
adopted,  the  express  sanction  of  the  Universal 
Church  was  given,  but  that  they  were  received 
in  block  as  legislation  well  calculated  for  the 
good  of  the  Church.   And  that  this  must  have 


been  the  understanding  at  the  time  is  evinced 
by  the  fact  that  while  the  Trullan  canons  con- 
demned a  number  of  "Western  customs  and 
usages,  as  I  shall  have  occasion  to  point  out 
in  its  proper  place,  no  objection  was  made  by 
the  Roman  legates  to  the  canon  of  the  Seventh 
Ecumenical  which  received  them  as  authori- 
tative. 


CANON  VIII. 

Persons  converted  from  the  heresy  of  those  who  are  called  Phrygians,  even 
should  they  be  among  those  reputed  by  them  as  clergymen,  and  even  should  they  be 
called  the  very  chiefest,  are  with  all  care  to  be  both  instructed  and  baptized  by  the 
bishops  and  presbyters  of  the  Church, 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VIII. 


When  Phrygians  return  they  arc  to  he  bap- 
tised aneiv,  even  if  among  them  they  were  reckoned 
clergymen. 

Hefele. 

This  synod  here  declares  the  baptism  of  the 
Montanists  invalid,  while  in  the  preceding 
canon  it  recognised  as  valid  the  baptism  of 
the  Novatians  and  Quartodecimans.  From 
this,  it  would  appear  that  the  Montanists 
were  suspected  of  heresy  with  regard  to  the 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  Some  other  authori- 
ties of  the  ancient  Church,  however,  judged 
differently,  and  for  a  long  time  it  was  a  ques- 
tion in  the  Church  whether  to  consider  the 
baptism  of  the  Montanists  valid  or  not. 
Dionysius  the  Great  of  Alexandria  was  in 
favour  of  its  validity :  but  this  Synod  and  the 
Second  General  Council  rejected  it  as  invalid, 
not  to  mention  the  Synod  of  Iconium  (235), 
which  declared  all  heretical  baptism  invalid. 
This  uncertainty  of  the  ancient  Church  is  ac- 
counted for  thus :  (a)  On  one  side  the  Monta- 
nists, and  especially  Tertullian,  asserted  that 
they  held  the  same  faith  and  sacraments, 
especially  the  same  baptism  (eadem  lavacri 
sacramenta)  as  the  Catholics.  St.  Epiphanius 
concurred  in  this,  and  testified  that  the  Mon- 
tanists taught  the  same  regarding  the  Father, 
the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  as  did  the 
Catholic  Church,  (b)  Other  Fathers,  how- 
ever, thought  less  favourably  of  them,  and 
for  this  reason,  that  the  Montanists  often  ex- 
pressed themselves  so  ambiguously,  that  they 
might,  nay,  must  be  said  completely  to  iden- 


tify the  Holy  Ghost  with  Montanus.  Thus 
Tertullian  in  quoting  expressions  of  Monta- 
nus, actually  says:  "the  Paraclete  speaks"  ; 
and  therefore  Firmilian,  Cyril  of  Jerusalem, 
Basil  the  Great,  and  other  Fathers,  did  in 
fact,  reproach  the  Montanists  with  this  identi- 
fication, and  consequently  held  their  baptism 
to  be  invalid,  (c)  Basil  the  Great  goes  to  the 
greatest  length  in  this  direction  in  maintain- 
ing that  the  Montanists  had  baptized  in  the 
name  of  the  Father,  of  the  Son,  and  of  Mon- 
tanus and  Priscilla.  But  it  is  very  probable, 
as  Tillemont  conjectured,  that  Basil  only 
founded  these  strange  stories  of  their  manner 
of  baptizing  upon  his  assumption  that  they 
identified  Montanus  with  the  Hoby  Ghost ; 
and,  as  Baronius  maintains,  it  is  equally 
probable  that  the  Montanists  did  not  alter  the 
form  of  baptism.  But,  even  admitting  all 
this,  their  ambiguous  expressions  concerning 
Montanus  and  the  Holy  Ghost  would  alone 
have  rendered  it  advisable  to  declare  their 
baptism  invalid,  (d)  Besides  this,  a  consid- 
erable number  of  Montanists,  namely,  the 
school  of  iEschines,  fell  into  Sabellianism,  and 
thus  their  baptism  was  decidedly  invalid. 
(Vide  Article  in  Wetzer  and  Welte  Kirehcn- 
lexicon  s.  v.  Montanus  ;  by  myself  [i.  e. 
Hefele]  ). 

In  conclusion,  it  must  be  observed  that 
Balsamon  and  Zonaras  rightly  understood 
the  words  in  our  text,  "  even  though  they  be 
called  the  very  chiefest,"  "though  they  be 
held  in  the  highest  esteem,"  to  refer  to  the 
most  distinguished  clergy  and  teachers  of  the 
Montanists. 


SYNOD   OF  LAODICEA.     A.D.  343-381 


129 


CANON  IX. 

The  members  of  the  Church  are  not  allowed  to  meet  in  the  cemeteries,  nor  attend  the 
so-called  martyries  of  any  of  the  heretics,  for  prayer  or  service ;  but  such  as  so  do,  if 
they  be  communicants,  shall  be  excommunicated  for  a  time ;  but  if  they  repent  and 
confess  that  they  have  sinned  they  shall  be  received. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  IX. 


Whoso  prayeth  in  the  cemeteries  and  martyries 
of  heretics  is  to  be  excommunicated. 

Zonabas. 
By  the  word  "  service  "  (9epaireia<;)  in  this 
canon  is  to  be  understood  the  healing  of  sick- 
ness. The  canon  wishes  that  the  faithful 
should  under  no  pretence  betake  themselves 
to  the  prayers  of  heretical  pseudo-martyrs 
nor  pay  them  honour  in  the  hope  of  obtaining 
the  healing  of  sickness  or  the  cure  of  their 
various  temptations.  And  if  any  do  so,  they 
are  to  be  cut  off,  that  is  for  a  time  forbidden 
communion  (and  this  refers  to  the  faithful 
who  are  only  laymen),  but  when  they  have 
done  penance  and  made  confession  of  their 
fault,  the  canon  orders  that  they  are  to  be  re- 
ceived back  again. 

Balsamon. 

As  canon  vi.  forbids  heretics  to  enter  the 
house  of  God,  so  this  canon  forbids  the  faithful 
to  go  to  the  cemeteries  of  heretics,  which  are 


called  by  them  "  Martyries."  .  .  .  For  in  the 
days  of  the  persecution,  certain  of  the  heretics, 
calling  themselves  Christians,  suffered  even 
to  death,  and  hence  those  who  shared  their 
opinions  called  them  "martyrs." 

Van  Espen. 

As  Catholics  had  their  martyrs,  so  too  had 
the  heretics,  and  especially  the  Montanists  or 
Phrygians,  who  greatly  boasted  of  them. 
Apollinaris  writes  of  these  as  may  be  seen  in 
Eusebius  (H.  E.,  Lib.  v.,  cap.  xvj.) 

The  places  or  cemeteries  in  which  rested 
the  bodies  of  those  they  boasted  of  as  martyrs, 
they  styled  "Martyries"  (martyria) as  similar 
places  among  Catholics  were  wont  to  be  called 
by  the  same  name,  from  the  bones  of  the  mar- 
tyrs that  rested  there. 

From  the  Greek  text,  as  also  from  Isidore's 
version  it  is  clear  that  this  canon  refers  to  all 
the  faithful  generally,  and  that  "  the  members 
of  the  Church "  (Lat.  Ecclesiastici,  the  word 
Dionysius  uses)  must  be  taken  in  this  wide 
signification. 


tics 


CANON  X. 
The  members  of  the  Church  shall  not  indiscriminately  marry  their  children  to  here- 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  X. 
Thou  shalt  not  marry  a  heretic. 


Fuchs. 
(Bib.  der  Eirchenvers.,  pt.  ii.,  p.  324) 
"  Indiscriminately  "  means  not  that  they 
might  be  given  in  marriage  to  some  heretics 
and  not  to  others  ;  but  that  it  should  not  be 
considered  a  matter  of  indifference  whether 
they  were  married  to  heretics  or  orthodox. 

Zonaras  and  Balsamon,  led  astray  by  the 
similar  canon  enacted  at  Chalcedon  (number 


xiv.),  suppose  this  restriction  only  to  apply  to 
the  children  of  the  clergy,  but  Van  Espen  has 
shewn  that  the  rule  is  of  general  application, 
He  adds,  however,  the  following  : 

Van  Espen. 
Since  by  the  custom  of  the  Greeks,  ecclesi- 
astics are  allowed  to  have  wives,  there  is  no 
doubt  that  the  marriage  of  their  children  with 
heretics  would  be  indecent  in  a  very  special 
degree,  although  there  are  many  things  which 
go  to  shew  that  marriage  with  heretics  was 
universally  deemed  a  thing  to  be  avoided  by 
Catholics,  and  was  rightly  forbidden. 


CANON  XL 

Peesbytides,  as  they  are  called,  or  female  presidents,  are  not  to  be  appointed  in  the 
Church. 

VOL.  XIV.  K 


130 


SYNOD   OF  LAODICEA.     A.D.  343-381 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XL 


Widows  called  presidents  shall  not  oc  appoint- 
ed in  churches. 

Balsamon. 

In  old  days  certain  venerable  women  (7rpeo-- 
fivT&es)  sat  in  Catholic  churches,  and  took 
care  that  the  other  women  kept  good  and 
modest  order.  But  from  their  habit  of  using 
improperly  that  which  was  proper,  either 
through  their  arrogancy  or  through  their  base 
self-seeking,  scandal  arose.  Therefore  the 
Fathers  prohibited  the  existence  in  the 
Church  thereafter  of  any  more  such  women 
as  are  called  presbytides  or  presidents.  And 
that  no  one  may  object  that  in  the  monaster- 
ies of  women  one  woman  must  preside  over 
the  rest,  it  should  be  remembered  that  the 
renunciation  which  they  make  of  themselves 
to  God  and  the  tonsure  brings  it  to  pass  that 
they  are  thought  of  as  one  body  though 
many  ;  and  all  things  which  are  theirs,  relate 
only  to  the  salvation  of  the  soul.  But  for  a 
woman  to  teach  in  a  Catholic  Church,  where 
a  multitude  of  men  is  gathered  together,  and 
women  of  different  opinions,  is,  in  the  highest 
degree,  indecorous  and  pernicious. 

Hefele. 

It  is  doubtful  what  was  here  intended,  and 
this  canon  has  received  very  different  inter- 
pretations. In  the  first  place,  what  is  the 
meaning  of  the  words  7rpeo-/3uTiSes  and  -n-poKa- 
Srjjx^vai  ("  presbytides  "  and  female  presi- 
dents) ?  I  think  the  first  light  is  thrown  on 
the  subject  by  Epipkanius,  who  in  his  treatise 
against  the  Collyridians  (Hcer.,  lxxix.  4)  says 
that  "  women  had  never  been  allowed  to  offer 
sacrifice,  as  the  Collyridians  presumed  to  do, 
but  were  only  allowed  to  minister.  There- 
fore there  were  only  deaconesses  in  the 
Church,  and  even  if  the  oldest  among  them 
were  called  '  presbytides,'  this  term  must  be 
clearly  distinguished  from  presbyteresses. 
The  latter  would  mean  priestesses  (UpiWas), 
but  'presbytides  '  only  designated  their  age, 
as  seniors."  According  to  this,  the  canon  ap- 
pears to  treat  of  the  superior  deaconesses 
who  were  the  overseers  (vpoKa&i]fievai)  of  the 
other  deaconesses  ;  and  the  further  words  of 
the  text  may  then  probably  mean  that  in 
future  no  more  such  superior  deaconesses  or 
eldresses  were  to  be  appointed,  probably  be- 
cause they  had  often  outstepped  their  author- 
ity. 

Neander,  Fuchs,  and  others,  however,  think 
it  more  probable  that  the  terms  in  question 


are  in  this  canon  to  be  taken  as  simply  mean- 
ing deaconesses,  for  even  in  the  church  they 
had  been  wont  to  preside  over  the  female  por- 
tion of  the  congregation  (whence  their  name 
of  "  presidents  ")  ;  and,  according  to  St. 
Paul's  rule,  only  widows  over  sixty  years  of 
age  were  to  be  chosen  for  this  office  (hence 
called  "  presbytides ").  We  may  add,  that 
this  direction  of  the  apostle  was  not  very 
strictly  adhered  to  subsequently,  but  still  it 
was  repeatedly  enjoined  that  only  elder  per- 
sons should  be  chosen  as  deaconesses.  Thus, 
for  instance,  the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  in  its 
fifteenth  canon,  required  that  deaconesses 
should  be  at  least  forty  years  of  age,  while 
the  Emperor  Theodosius  even  prescribed  the 
age  of  sixty. 

Supposing  now  that    this    canon   simply 
treats  of  deaconesses,  a  fresh  doubt  arises  as 
to  how  the  last  words — "  they  are  not  to  be 
appointed  in  the  Church  "  are  to  be  under- 
stood.    For  it  may  mean  that  "  from  hence- 
forth no  more  deaconesses  shall  be  appoint- 
ed ;  "  or,  that  "  in  future  they  shall  no  more 
be  solemnly  ordained  in  the  church."     The 
first  interpretation  would,  however,  contra- 
dict the  fact  that  the  Greek  Church  had  dea- 
conesses long  after  the  Synod  of  Laodicea. 
For  instance,  in  692  the  Synod  in  Truth  (Can. 
xiv.)  ordered  that  "  no  one  under  forty  years 
of  age  should  be  ordained  deaconess."     Con- 
sequently the   second   interpretation,  "  they 
!  shall  not  be  solemnly  ordained  in  the  church," 
j  seems  a  better  one,  and  Neander  decidedly 
prefers  it.     It  is  certainly  true  that  several 
|  later  synods  distinctly  forbade  the  old  prac- 
j  tice  of  conferring  a  sort  of  ordination  upon 
:  deaconesses,  as,  for  instance,  the  first  Synod 
i  of  Orange  (Arausicanum  I.  of  441,  Can.  xxvj.) 
in   the   words — diaconce   omnimodis  non  ordi- 
'  nandce ;    also   the   Synod   at   Epaon   in   517 
j  (Can.  xxj.),  and  the  second  Synod  at  Orleans 
j  in  533  (Can.  xviij.) ;  but  in  the  Greek  Church 
I  at  least,  an  ordination,  a  xeiporovetcr^ai,  took 
|  place  as  late  as  the  Council  in  Trullo  (Can. 
1  xiv.).     But  this  Canon  of  Laodicea  does  not 
i  speak  of  solemn  dedication,  and  certainly  not 
of  ordination,  but  only  of  Ka&'oraon&u.     These 
reasons  induce  us  to  return  to  the  first  inter- 
pretation of  this  canon,  and  to  understand  it 
as  forbidding  from  that  time  forward  the  ap- 
pointment of  any  more  chief  deaconesses  or 
"presbytides." 

Zonaras  and  Balsamon  give  }Tet  another  ex- 
planation.    In  their  opinion,  these  "  presby- 
tides "  were  not  chief  deaconesses,  but  aged 
I  women  in  general  {ex  populo),  to  whom  was 


SYNOD   OF  LAODICEA.     A.D.  343-381 


131 


given  the  supervision  of  the  females,  in 
church.  The  Synod  of  Laodicea,  however, 
did  away  with  this  arrangement,  probably  be- 
cause they  had  misused  their  office  for  pur- 
poses of  pride,  or  money-making,  bribery,  etc. 

Compare  with  the  foregoing  the  Excursus 
on  Deaconesses,  appended  to  Canon  XIX.  of 
Nice. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 


Ccmonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
XXXIL,  c.  xix.,  in  Isidore's  version  ;  but  Van 
Espen  remarks  that  the  Roman  Correctors 
have  pointed  out  that  it  departs  widely  from 
the  Greek  original.  The  Roman  Correctors 
further  say  "  The  note  of  Balsamon  on  this 
point  should  be  seen  ; "  and  with  this  inter- 
pretation Morinus  also  agrees  in  his  work  on 
Holy  Orders  {Be  Ordinationibus,  Pars  III., 
Exercit.  x.,  cap.  iij.,  n.  3), 


CANON  XII. 

Bishops  are  to  be  appointed  to  the  ecclesiastical  government  by  the  judgment  of 
the  metropolitans  and  neighbouring  bishops,  after  having  been  long  proved  both  in  the 
foundation  of  their  faith  and  in  the  conversation  of  an  honest  life. 


NOTE. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XII. 
Wlwever  is  most  approved  in  faith  and  life 
and  most  learned,  he  is  ft  to  be  chosen  bishop. 


1      The   first    part    of   this  canon    is    in  con- 
formity with  the  provision  in  the  IV,  canon  of 

Nice. 


CANON  XIII. 

The  election  of  those  who  are  to  be  appointed  to  the  priesthood  is  not  to  be  com- 
mitted to  the  multitude. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XIII. 
Wlioso  is  chosen  by  seculars  is  ineligible. 

Balsamon. 

From  this  canon  it  is  evident  that  in  an- 
cient times  not  only  bishops  but  also  priests 
were  voted  for  by  the  multitude  of  the  peo- 
ple.    This  is  here  forbidden. 

Aeistenus. 

Bishops  are  elected  by  metropolitans  and 
other  bishops.  If  anyone  in  this  manner 
shall  not  have  been  promoted  to  the  Episco- 
pate, but  shall  have  been  chosen  by  the  multi- 
tude, he  is  not  to  be  admitted  nor  elected. 

[It  is  clear  from  this  that  by  "  the  Priest- 
hood "  Aristenus  understands  the  episcopate, 
and  I  think  rightly.] 

Van  Espen. 

The  word  in  the  Greek  to  which  "multi- 
tude "  corresponds  (oxXos)  properly  signifies 
a  tumult.1 

What  the  fathers  intend  to  forbid  are 
tumultuous  elections,  that  is,  that  no  atten- 
tion is  to  be  paid  to  riotous  demonstrations 


on  the  part  of  the  people,  when  with  acclama- 
tions they  are  demanding  the  ordination  of 
anyone,  with  an  appearance  of  sedition.  Such 
a  state  of  affairs  St.  Augustine  admirably 
describes  in  his  Epistola  ad  Albinam  (Epist. 
cxxvi.,  Tom.  II.,  col.  548,  Ed.  Gaume). 

And  it  is  manifest  that  by  this  canon  the 
people  were  not  excluded  from  all  share  in 
the  election  of  bishops  and  priests  from  what 
St.  Gregory  Nazianzen  says,  in  Epistola  ad 
Ccesarienses,  with  regard  to  the  election  of  St. 
Basil.  From  this  what  could  be  more  evi- 
dent than  that  after  this  canon  was  put  out 
the  people  in  the  East  still  had  their  part  in 
the  election  of  a  bishop  ?  This  also  is  clear 
from  Justinian's  "Novels"  (Novellce,  cxxiij., 
c.j.,  and  cxxxvij.,  c.  ij.) 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
lxiii.,  can.  vj.,  but  in  proof  of  the  proposition 
that  laymen  were  hereby  forbidden  to  have 
any  share  in  elections.  Van  Espen  notes  that 
Isidore's  version  favours  Gratian's  misunder- 
standing, and  says  that  "no  doubt  that  this 
version  did  much  to  exclude  the  people  from 
the  election  of  bishops." 


1  More  accurately  "  a  tumultuous  and  riotous  mob  "  vide  Lidclell  and  Scott.  ; 
K  2 


132 


SYNOD   OF  LAODICEA.    A.D.  343-381 


CANON  XIY. 

The  holy  tilings  are  not  to  be  sent  into  other  dioceses  at  the  feast  of  Easter  by  way 
of  eulogize. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XIV. 

It  is  not  right  to  send  the  holy  gifts  to  another 
parish. 

Hefele. 

It  was  a  custom  in  the  ancient  Church,  not 
indeed  to  consecrate,  but  to  bless  such  of 
the  several  breads  of  the  same  form  laid  on 
the  altar  as  were  not  needed  for  the  com- 
munion, and  to  employ  them,  partly  for  the 
maintenance  of  the  clergy,  and  partly  for  dis- 
tributing to  those  of  the  faithful  who  did  not 
communicate  at  the  Mass.  The  breads  thus 
blessed  were  called  eulogice.  Another  very 
ancient  custom  was,  that  bishops  as  a  sign  of 
Church  fellowship,  should  send  the  conse- 
crated bread  to  one  another.  That  the  Roman 
Popes  of  the  first  and  second  centuries  did  so, 
Iren?eus  testifies  in  his  letter  to  Pope  Victor 
in  Eusebius.  In  course  of  time,  however, 
instead  of  the  consecrated  bread,  only  bread 
which  had  been  blessed,  or  eulogice,  were  sent 
abroad.  For  instance,  Paulinus  and  Augus- 
tine sent  one  another  these  eulogice.  But  at 
Easter  the  older  custom  still  prevailed  ;  and 
to  invest  the  matter  with  more  solemnity, 
instead  of  the  eidogice,  the  consecrated  bread, 
i.e.,  the  Eucharist,  was  sent  out.  The  Synod 
of  Laodicea  forbids  this,  probably  out  of 
reverence  to  the  holy  Sacrament. 

Binterim  (Denlciviirclegkciten,  vol.  IV.,  P.  iij., 
p.  535.)  gives  another  explanation.  He  starts 
from  the  fact  that,  with  the  Greeks  as  well  as 
the  Latins,  the  wafer  intended  for  commun- 
ion is  generally  called  sancta  or  ayia  even 
before  the  consecration.  This  is  not  only 
perfectly  true,  but  a  well-known  fact  ;  only  it 
must  not  be  forgotten  that  these  wafers  or 


oblations  were  only  called  sancta  by  anticipa- 
tion, and  because  of  the  sanctificatio  to  which 
they  were  destined.  Binterim  then  states 
that  by  ayia  in  the  canon  is  to  be  understood 
not  the  breads  already  consecrated,  but  those 
still  unconsecrated.  He  further  conjectures 
that  these  unconsecrated  breads  were  often 
sent  about  instead  of  the  eulogice,  and  that 
the  Synod  of  Laodicea  had  forbidden  this,  not 
during  the  whole  year,  but  only  at  Easter. 
He  cannot,  however,  give  any  reason,  and  his 
statement  is  the  more  doubtful,  as  he  cannot 
prove  that  these  unconsecrated  communion 
breads  really  used  before  to  be  sent  about  as 
eulogice. 

In  connection  with  this,  however,  he  adds 
another  hypothesis.  It  is  known  that  the 
Greeks  only  consecrate  a  square  piece  of  the 
little  loaf  intended  for  communion,  which  is 
first  cut  out  with  the  so-called  holy  spear. 
The  remainder  of  the  small  loaf  is  divided 
into  little  pieces,  which  remain  on  or  near  the 
altar  during  Mass,  after  which  they  are  dis- 
tributed to  the  non-communicants.  These 
remains  of  the  small  loaf  intended  for  conse- 
cration are  called  avTiSwpa.  and  Binterim's 
second  conjecture  is,  that  these  avriSvpa 
might  perhaps  have  been  sent  as  eidogice  and 
may  be  the  iiyia  of  this  canon.  But  he  is 
unable  to  prove  that  these  dvTi'Scopa  were  sent 
about,  and  is,  moreover,  obliged  to  confess 
that  they  are  nowhere  called  eulogice,  while 
this  canon  certainly  speaks  of  eulogice.  To 
this  must  be  added  that,  as  with  regard  to 
the  unconsecrated  wafer,  so  we  see  no  suffi- 
cient cause  why  the  Synod  should  have  for- 
bidden these  uvnSwpa  being  sent. 


CANON  XV. 


No  others  shall  sing  in  the  Church,  save  only  the  canonical  singers,  who  go  up  into 


the  anibo  and  sing  from  a  book. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XV, 


NOTES. 


No  one  should  ascend  the  ambon  unless  he  is 
tonsured. 

Hefele. 

The  only  question  [presented  by  this  canon] 
is  whether  this  synod  forbade  the  laity  to  take 
any  part  in  the  Church  music,  as  Binius  and 
others  have  understood  the  words  of  the  text, 


or  whether  it  only  intended  to  forbid  those 
who  were  not  cantors  taking  the  lead.  Van 
Espen  and  Neander  in  particular  were  in 
favour  of  the  latter  meaning,  pointing  to  the 
fact  that  certainly  in  the  Greek  Church  after 
the  Synod  of  Laodicea  the  people  were  accus- 
tomed to  join  in  the  singing,  as  Chrysostom 
and  Basil  the  Great  sufficiently  testify.  Bing- 
ham propounded  a  peculiar  opinion,  namely, 


SYNOD  OP  LAODICEA.    A.D.  343-381 


133 


that  this  Synod  did  indeed  forbid  the  laity 
to  sing  in  the  church,  or  even  to  join  in  the 
singing,  but  this  only  temporarily,  for  certain 


reasons.     I  have  no  doubt,  however,  that  Van 
Espen  and  Neander  take  the  truer  view. 


CANON  XVI. 
The  Gospels  are  to  be  read  on  the  Sabbath  [i.e.  Saturday],  with  the  other  Scriptures. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XVI. 

The  Gospel,  the  Epistle  [dirdo-roAos]  and  the 
other  Scriptures  are  to  be  read  on  the  Sabbath. 

Balsamon. 

Before  the  arrangement  of  the  Ecclesiastical 
Psalmody  was  settled,  neither  the  Gospel  nor 
the  other  Scriptures  were  accustomed  to  be 
read  on  the  Sabbath.  But  out  of  regard  to 
the  canons  which  forbade  fasting  or  kneeling 
on  the  Sabbath,  there  were  no  services,  so  that 
there  might  be  as  much  feasting  as  possible. 
This  the  fathers  prohibit,  and  decree  that  on 
the  Sabbath  the  whole  ecclesiastical  office 
shall  be  said. 

Neander  (Kirchc)igesch.,  2d  ed.,  vol.  iij.,  p. 
565  et  scq.)  suggests  in  addition  to  the  inter- 
pretation just  given  another,  viz.:  that  it  was 
the  custom  in  many  parts  of  the  ancient 
Church  to  keep  every  Saturday  as  a  feast  in 
commemoration  of  the  Creation.  Neander 
also  suggests  that  possibly  some  Judaizers 


read  on  the  Sabbath  only  the  Old  Testament ; 
he,  however,  himself  remarks  that  in  this  case 
cwyye'Ata  and  kripwv  ypa^ihv  would  require  the 
article. 

Van  Espen. 

Among  the  Greeks  the  Sabbath  was  kept 
exactly  as  the  Lord's  day  except  so  far  as  the 
cessation  of  work  was  concerned,  wherefore 
the  Council  wishes  that,  as  on  Sundays,  after 
the  other  lessons  there  should  follow  the 
Gospel. 

For  it  is  evident  that  by  the  intention  of 
the  Church  the  whole  Divine  Office  was  de- 
signed for  the  edification  and  instruction  of 
the  people,  and  especially  was  this  the  case 
on  feast  days,  when  the  people  were  apt  to 
be  present  in  large  numbers. 

Here  we  may  note  the  origin  of  our  present 
[Western]  discipline,  by  which  on  Sundays 
and  feast  days  the  Gospel  is  wont  to  be  read 
with  the  other  Scriptures  in  the  canonical 
hours,  while  such  is  not  the  case  on  ferial 
days,  or  in  the  order  for  ferias  and  "  simples." 1 


CANON  XVII. 

The  Psalms  are  not  to  be  joined  together  in  the  congregations,  but  a  lesson  shall 
intervene  after  every  psalm. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XVII. 

In  time  of  service  lessons  shall  be  interspersed 
with  the  Psalms. 

Aristenus. 

It  was  well  to  separate  the  Psalms  by  les- 
sons when  the  congregation  was  gathered  in 
church,  and  not  to  keep  them  continuously 
singing  unbroken  psalmody,  lest  those  who 
had  assembled  might  become  careless  through 
weariness. 


Zonae  as. 

This  was  an  ancient  custom  which  has  been 
laid  aside  since  the  new  order  of  ecclesiastical 
matters  has  been  instituted.3 

Van  Espen. 

Here  it  may  be  remarked  we  find  the  real 
reason  why  in  our  present  rite,  the  lections, 
verses,  etc.,  of  the  nocturns  are  placed  be- 
tween the  Psalms,  so  as  to  repel  weariness. 


1  "Simples"  (simplici)  are  distinguished  from  "doubles"  (dw- 
plici)  in  not  having  their  antiphons  said  double  but  only  once. 

2 1  do  not  understand  this  note,  as  to-day  in  the  Divine  Office 
of  the  Greek  Church  the  Psalms  are  still  divided  by  Lessons. 


Vide  The  Horologion  (up6Koyi.ov  to  txiya.)  and  an  English  transla- 
tion by  G.  V.  Shann,  entitled  Euchology,  A  Manual  of  Prayers 
of  the  Holy  Orthodox  Church. 


134 


SYNOD    OF   LAODICEA.     A.D.  343-381 


CANON  XVIII. 
The  same  service  of  prayers  is  to  be  said  always  botli  at  nones  and  at  vespers. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XVIII. 


The  same  prayers  shall  be  said  at  nones  and 
vespers, 

Hefele. 

Some  feasts  ended  at  the  ninth  hour,  others 
only  in  the  evening,  and  both  alike  with 
prayer.  The  Synod  here  wills  that  in  both 
cases  the  same  prayers  should  be  used.  Thus 
does  Van  Espen  explain  the  words  of  the  text, 
and  I  think  rightly.     But  the  Greek  commen- 


tator understands  the  Synod  to  order  that 
the  same  prayers  should  be  used  in  all  places, 
thus  excluding  all  individual  caprice.  Ac- 
cording to  this,  the  rule  of  conformity  would 
refer  to  places ;  while,  according  to  Van 
Espen,  the  nones  and  vespers  were  to  be  the 
same.  If,  however,  this  interpretation  were 
correct,  the  Synod  would  not  have  only 
spoken  of  the  prayers  at  nones  and  vespers, 
but  would  have  said  in  general,  "  all  dioceses 
shall  use  the  same  form  of  prayer." 


EXCURSUS  ON   THE  CHOIR   OFFICES   OF   THE   EARLY   CHURCH. 

Nothing  is  more  marked  in  the  lives  of  the  early  followers  of  Christ  than  the  abiding 
sense  which  they  had  of  the  Divine  Presence.  Prayer  was  not  to  them  an  occasional  exercise 
but  an  unceasing  practice.  If  then  the  Psalmist  sang  in  the  old  dispensation  "Seven  times  a 
day  do  I  praise  thee  "  (Ps.  cxix.  164),  we  may  be  quite  certain  that  the  Christians  would 
never  fall  behind  the  Jewish  example.  We  know  that  among  the  Jews  there  were  the  "  Hours 
of  Prayer,"  and  nothing  would  be,  d  priori,  more  likely  than  that  with  new  and  deeper  sig- 
nificance these  should  pass  over  into  the  Christian  Church.  I  need  not  pause  here  to  re- 
mind the  reader  of  the  observance  of  "  the  hour  of  prayer  "  which  is  mentioned  in  the  New 
Testament,  and  shall  pass  on  to  my  more  immediate  subject. 

Most  liturgiologists  have  been  agreed  that  the  "  Choir  Offices  "  of  the  Christian  Church, 
that  is  to  say  the  recitation  of  the  Psalms  of  David,  with  lessons  from  other  parts  of  Holy 
Scripture  and  collects,1  was  an  actual  continuation  of  the  Jewish  worship,  the  melodies  even 
of  the  Psalms  being  carried  over  and  modified  through  the  ages  into  the  plain  song  of  to- 
day. For  this  view  of  the  Jewish  origin  of  the  Canonical  Hours  there  is  so  much  to  be  said 
that  one  hesitates  to  accept  a  rival  theory,  recently  set  forth  with  much  skill  and  learning, 
by  a  French  priest,  who  had  the  inestimable  happiness  of  sitting  at  the  feet  of  De  Rossi. 
M.  Pierre  Battifol 2  is  of  opinion  that  the  Canonical  Hours  in  no  way  come  from  the  Jewish 
Hours  of  Prayer  but  are  the  outgroAvth  of  the  Saturday  Vigil  service,  which  was  wholly  of 
Christian  origin,  and  which  he  tells  us  was  divided  into  three  parts,  j.,  the  evening  service,  or 
lucernarhtm,  which  was  the  service  of  Vespers  ;  ij.,  the  midnight  service,  the  origin  of  the  Noc- 
turns  or  Mattins  ;  iij.,  the  service  at  daybreak,  the  origin  of  Lauds.  Soon  vigils  were  kept 
for  all  the  martyr  commemorations  ;  and  by  the  time  of  Tertullian,  if  not  before,  Wednes- 
days and  Fridays  had  their  vigils.  With  the  growth  of  monasticism  they  became  daily. 
This  Mr.  Battifol  thinks  was  introduced  into  Antioch  about  a.d.  350,  and  soon  spread  all 
over  the  East.  The  "  little  hours,"  that  is  Terce,  Sext,  and  None,  he  thinks  were  monastic  in 
origin  and  that  Prime  and  Compline  were  transferred  from  the  dormitory  to  the  church, 
just  as  the  martyrology  was  ti'ansferred  from  the  refectory. 

Such  is  the  new  theory,  which,  even  if  rejected,  at  least  is  valuable  in  drawing  attention 
to  the  great  importance  of  the  vigil-service  in  the  Early  Church,  an  importance  still  attach- 
ing to  it  in  Russia  on  the  night  of  Easter  Even. 


1  Vide  Tertulliau. 

2  Histoire  du  Breviaire  Romain.  Paris.  1893.  Ail  English  trans- 
lation has  since  (1893)  appeared  by  the  Rev.  A.  M.  Y. 


which  is  not  in  principle  changed  so  far  as  this  discussion  is  con- 
cerned. 


Bayley, 


SYNOD   OF   LAODICEA.     A.D.  343-381  135 

Of  the  twilight  service  we  have  a  most  exquisite  remains  in  the  hymn  to  be  sung  at  the  light- 
ing of  the  lamps.  This  is  one  of  the  few  Psalmi  idiotici  which  has  survived  the  condemna- 
tion of  such  compositions  by  the  early  councils,  in  fact  the  only  two  others  are  the  Gloria 
in  Excelsis  and  the   Te  Deum.     The  hymn  at  the  lighting  of  the  lamps  is  as  follows: 

"  0  gladsome  light 

Of  the  Father  Immortal, 
And  of  the  celestial 
Sacred  and  blessed 
Jesus,  our  Saviour ! 

'•'  Now  to  the  sunset 
Again  hast  thou  brought  us ; 
And  seeing  the  evening 
Twilight,  we  bless  thee, 
Praise  thee,  adore  thee ! 

u  Father  omnipotent ! 
Son,  the  Life-giver ! 
Spirit,  the  Comforter ! 
Worthy  at  all  times 
Of  worship  and  wonder !  "  ' 

Dr.  Battifol's  new  theory  was  promptly  attacked  by  P.  Suibbert  Baumer,  a  learned  Ger- 
man Benedictine  who  had  already  written  several  magazine  articles  on  the  subject  before 
Battifol's  book  had  appeared. 

The  title  of  Baumer' s  book  is  Geschichte  des  Breviers,  Vcrsuch  e'mer  quellenmassigen  Darstcl- 
lung  dcr  EntwicMung  des  cdtltirchen  und  des  rdmesclicn  Officiumsbis  aufunscre  Tagc.  (Freiburg  in 
Briesgau,  1895.)  The  following  a  may  be  taken  as  a  fair  resume  of  the  position  taken  in  this 
work  and  most  ably  defended,  a  position  which  (if  I  may  be  allowed  to  express  an  opinion)  is 
more  likely  to  prevail  as  being  most  in  accordance  with  the  previous  researches  of  the 
learned. 

"The  early  Christians  separated  from  the  Synagogues  about  a.d.  65;  that  is,  about  the 
same  time  as  the  first  Epistle  to  Timothy  was  written,  and  at  this  moment  of  separation  from 
the  Synagogue  the  Apostles  had  already  established,  besides  the  liturgy,  at  least  one,  proba- 
bly two,  canonical  hours  of  prayer,  Mattins  and  Evensong,  Besides  what  we  should  call 
sermons,  the  service  of  these  hours  was  made  up  of  psalms,  readings  from  Holy  Scripture, 
and  extempore  prayers.  A  few  pages  on  (p.  42)  Baumer  allows  that  even  if  this  service  had 
been  daily  in  Jerusalem  in  the  Apostles'  times,  yet  it  had  become  limited  to  Sundays  in  the 
sub-Apostolic  times,  when  persecution  would  not  allow  the  Apostolic  custom  of  daily  morn- 
ing and  evening  public  prayer.  Yet  the  practice  of  private  prayer  at  the  third,  sixth,  and 
ninth  hours  continued,  based  upon  an  Apostolic  tradition  ;  and  thus,  when  the  tyranny  of 
persecution  was  overpast,  the  idea  of  public  prayer  at  these  hours  was  saved  and  the  prac- 
tice carried  on." 

The  student  should  by  no  means  omit  to  read  Dom  Prosper  Gueranger's  Institutions  Litur- 
giques,  which  while  written  in  a  bitter  and  most  partisan  spirit,  is  yet  a  work  of  the  most  pro- 
found learning.  Above  all  anyone  professing  any  familiarity  with  the  literature  on  the 
subject  must  have  mastered  Cardinal  Bona's  invaluable  Be  Divina  Psahnodia,  a  mine  of  wis- 
dom and  a  wonder  of  research. 

1  Longfellow.    The  Golden  Legend  II.  Liddon's  remarks  upon  this  hymn  are  well  worth  the  reader's  attention,  Bampton  Lectures, 
Lect.  VII.,  where  Keble's  translation  will  be  found. 
3  Taken  from  the  Church  Quarterly  Review,  1898. 


136 


SYNOD   OF  LAODICEA.    A.D.  343-381 


CANON  XIX. 

After  the  sermons  of  the  Bishops,  the  prayer  for  the  catechumens  is  to  be  made 
first  by  itself ;  and  after  the  catechumens  have  gone  out,  the  prayer  for  those  who  are 
under  penance  ;  and,  after  these  have  passed  under  the  hand  [of  the  Bishop]  and  de- 
parted, there  should  then  be  offered  the  three  prayers  of  the  faithful,  the  first  to  be  said 
entirely  in  silence,  the  second  and  third  aloud,  and  then  the  [kiss  of]  peace  is  to  be 
given.  And,  after  the  presbyters  have  given  the  [kiss  of]  peace  to  the  Bishop,  then  the 
laity  are  to  give  it  [to  one  another],  and  so  the  Holy  Oblation  is  to  be  completed.  And 
it  is  lawful  to  the  priesthood  alone  to  go  to  the  Altar  and  [there]  communicate. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XIX. 


After  the  {trayers  of  the  catechumens  shall  be 
said  those  of  the  Penitents,  and  afterwards  those 
of  the  faithful.  And  after  the  peace,  or  em- 
brace, has  been  given,  the  offering  shall  be  made. 
Only  priests  shall  enter  the  sanctuary  and 
make  there  their  communion . 

The  Greek  commentators  throw  but  little 
if  any  light  upon  this  canon.  A  question  has 
been  raised  as  to  who  said  the  prayers  men- 
tioned.    Van  Espen,  following  Isidore's  trans- 


lation "  they  also  pray  who  are  doing  pen- 
ance," thinks  the  prayer  of  the  penitents,  said 
by  themselves,  is  intended,  and  not  the  prayer 
said  by  the  Bishop.  But  Hefele,  following 
Dionysius's  version — "the  prayers  over  the 
catechumens,"  "over  those  who  are  doing 
penance  " — thinks  that  the  liturgical  prayers 
are  intended,  which  after  the  sermon  were 
wont  to  be  said  "  over  "  the  different  classes. 
Dionysius  does  not  say  "over"  the  faithful, 
but  describes  them  as  "  the  prayers  of  the 
faithful,"  which  Hefele  thinks  means  that  the 
faithful  joined  in  reciting  them. 


EXCURSUS  ON  THE  WORSHIP  OF  THE  EARLY  CHURCH. 

(Percival,  H.  R.  :  Johnson's  Universal  Cyclopaedia,  Vol.  V.,  s.  v.  Liturgies.) 

St.  Paul  is  by  some  learned  writers  supposed  to  have  quoted  in  several  places  the  already 
existing  liturgy,  especially  in  I.  Cor.  ij.  9.,1  and  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  Lord's 
prayer  was  used  and  certain  other  formulas  which  are  referred  to  by  St.  Luke  in  the  Acts  of 
the  Apostles 2  as  "  the  Apostles'  prayers."  How  early  these  forms  were  committed  to  writing 
has  been  much  disputed  among  the  learned,  and  it  would  be  rash  to  attempt  to  rule  this 
question.  Pierre  Le  Brun 3  presents  most  strongly  the  denial  of  their  having  been  written 
during  the  first  three  centuries,  and  Probst 4  argues  against  this  opinion.  While  it  does  not 
seem  possible  to  prove  that  before  the  fourth  century  the  liturgical  books  were  written  out 
in  full,  owing  no  doubt  to  the  influence  of  the  disciplina  arcani,  it  seems  to  be  true  that  much 
earlier  than  this  there  was  a  definite  and  fixed  order  in  the  celebration  of  divine  worship  and 
in  the  administration  of  the  sacraments.  The  famous  passage  in  St.  Justin  Martyr  5  seems 
to  point  to  the  existence  of  such  a  form  in  his  day,  shewing  how  even  then  the  service  for  the 
Holy  Eucharist  began  with  the  Epistle  and  Gospel.  St.  Augustine  and  St.  Chrysostom 
bear  witness  to  the  same  thing.6 

Within,  comparatively  speaking,  a  few  years,  a  good  deal  of  information  with  regard  to 
the  worship  of  the  early  Church  has  been  given  us  by  the  discovery  of  the  AtSa^,  and  of  the 
fragments  the  Germans  describe  as  the  K.  O.,  and  by  the  publication  of  M.  Gamurrini's 
transcript  of  the  Pcregrinatio  Sihiee.1 


1  J.  M.  Neale.    Essays  on  Liturgiology. 
2Actsij.  42. 

3  Pierre  Le  Brim.    Explic.  Tom.  II.,  Diss,  j,  p.  n.,  et  seqq. 

4  Probst.    Liturgie  derdrei  ersten  Ckristichen  Jahrhunderten. 
bApolog.    Cap.  LXVTI. 

"  I  venture  to  draw  the  reader's  attention  to  the  rest  of  this  arti- 
cle as  containing  information  not  readily  found  elsewhere. 


'  The  MS.  from  which  this  was  printed  was  found  in  a  library 
in  Arezzo.  Silvia  was  a  lady  of  rank,  living  in  the  times  of  Theo- 
dosius,  who  made  a  pilgrimage  to  Jerusalem  and  the  Holy  Places 
from  Meridian  Gaul.  To  us  the  chief  interest  of  her  book  Ues  in 
the  account  she  gives  of  the  services.  The  following  is  the  title, 
,S\  Silvias  Aquittanoz  pcregrinatio  ad  loca  Sancta.  It  will  be 
found  in  the  Biblioteca  deW  Accademia  storica  giuridica.    Tom. 


SYNOD   OF  LAODICEA.     A.D.  343-381 


137 


From  all  these  it  is  thought  that  liturgical  information  of  the  greatest  value  can  be 
obtained.  Moreover  the  first  two  are  thought  to  throw  much  light  upon  the  age  and  con- 
struction of  the  Apostolical  Constitutions.  "Without  in  any  way  committing  myself  to  the 
views  I  now  proceed  to  quote,  I  lay  them  before  the  reader  as  the  results  of  the  most  ad- 
vanced criticism  in  the  matter. 

(Duchesne.     Origines  du  Quite  Chretien,  p.  54  et  seqq.) 
All  known  liturgies  may  be  reduced  to  four  principal  types — the  Syrian,  the  Alexandrian, 
the  Roman,  and  the  Gallican.    In  the  fourth  century  there  certainly  existed  these  four  types  at 
the  least,  for  the  Syrian  had  already  given  rise  to  several  sub-types  which  were  clearly  marked. 
The  most  ancient  documents  of  the  Syrian  Liturgy  are  : 

1.  The  Catechetical  Lectures  of  St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  delivered  about  the  year  347. 

2.  The  Apostolic  Constitutions  (Bk.  II.,  57,  and  Bk.  VIII.,  5-15). 

3.  The  homilies  of  St.  John  Chrysostom. 

St.  John  Chrysostom  often  quotes  lines  of  thought  and  even  prayers  taken  from  the  lit- 
urgy. Bingham  *  was  the  first  to  have  the  idea  of  gathering  together  and  putting  in  order 
these  scattered  references.  This  work  has  been  recently  taken  in  hand  afresh  by  Mr.  Ham- 
mond.2 From  this  one  can  find  much  interesting  corroborative  evidence,  but  the  orator  does 
not  give  anywhere  a  systematic  description  of  the  liturgy,  in  the  order  of  its  rites  and  prayers. 

The  Catechetical  Lectures  of  St.  Cyril  are  really  a  commentary  upon  the  ceremonies  of  the 
mass,  made  to  the  neophytes  after  their  initiation.  The  preacher  does  not  treat  of  the  missa 
catechumenorum  because  his  hearers  had  so  long  been  familiar  with  it ;  he  presupposes  the  bread 
and  wine  to  have  been  brought  to  and  placed  upon  the  altar,  and  begins  at  the  moment  when 
the  bishop  prepares  himself  to  celebrate  the  Holy  Mysteries  by  washing  his  hands. 

In  the  Apostolic  Constitutions  a  distinction  must  be  drawn  between  Book  II.  and  Book 
VIII.  The  first  is  very  sketchy ;  it  only  contains  a  description  of  the  rites  without  the 
words  used,  the  other  gives  at  length  all  the  formulas  of  the  prayers,  but  only  from  the  end 
of  the  Gospel. 

We  know  now  that  the  Apostolical  Constitutions  in  the  present  state  of  the  Greek  text 
represent  a  melting  down  and  fusing  together  of  two  analogous  books — the  Didaskalc  of  the 
Apostles,  of  which  only  a  Syriac  version  is  extant ;  and  the  Didake  of  the  Apostles,  recently 
discovered  by  the  metropolitan,  Philotheus  Bryennius.  The  first  of  these  two  books  has 
served  as  a  basis  for  the  first  six  books  of  the  Apostolical  Constitutions.  The  second,  much 
spread  out,  has  become  the  seventh  book  of  the  same  collection.  The  eighth  book  is  more 
homogeneous.  It  must  have  been  added  to  the  seven  others  by  the  author  of  the  recension 
of  the  Didaskale  and  of  the  DidaJcc.  This  author  is  the  same  as  he  who  made  the  interpola- 
tions in  the  seven  authentic  letters  of  St.  Ignatius,  and  added  to  them  six  others  of  his  own 
manufacture.  He  lived  at  Antioch  in  Syria,  or  else  in  the  ecclesiastical  region  of  which  that 
city  was  the  centre.  He  wrote  about  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century,  at  the  very  high  tide 
of  the  Subordination  theology,  which  finds  expression  more  than  once  in  his  different  com- 
positions. He  is  the  author  of  the  description  of  the  liturgy,  which  is  found  in  Book  II.  ; 
in  fact,  that  whole  passage  is  lacking  in  the  Syriac  DidasJccde.  Was  it  also  he  who  composed 
the  liturgy  of  the  VIHth  book  ?  This  is  open  to  doubt,  for  there  are  certain  differences 
between  this  liturgy  and  that  of  the  lid  book.  3 

I  shall  now  describe  the  religious  service  such  as  these  documents  suppose,  noting,  where 
necessary,  their  divergences. 


IV.     Rome,  1887,  and  again  in  the  Studi  e  Document!  di  sto- 
ria  e  dir  itto,  April-September,  1888,  and  the  liturgical  parts  in 
an  appendix  to  Duchesne .    Of  the  other  books  the  best  edition 
is  Adolf  Harnack's. 
1  Bingham,    Antiquities,  XIII.  6. 


2  Hammond.     The  Ancient  Liturgy  of  Antioch  (Oxford,  1879). 

a  The  reader  will,  of  course,  recognize  the  foregoing  as  a  piece 
of  "  Higher  Criticism,"  and  need  not  be  told  that  it  rests  upon  no 
foundation  more  secure  than  probable  guess-work. 


138  SYNOD   OF   LAODICEA.     A.D.  343-381 

The  congregation  is  gathered  together,  the  men  on  one  side  the  women  on  the  other,  the 
clergy  in  the  apsidal  chancel.  The  readings  immediately  begin  ;  they  are  interrupted  by 
chants.  A  reader  ascends  the  ambo,  which  stood  in  the  middle  of  the  church,  between  the 
clergy  and  the  people,  and  read  two  lessons  ;  then  another  goes  up  in  his  place  to  sing  a 
psalm.  This  he  executes  as  a  solo,  but  the  congregation  join  in  the  last  modulations  of  the 
chant  and  continue  them.  This  is  what  is  called  the  "  Kesponse "  (psalmus  responsorhts), 
which  must  be  distinguished  carefully  from  the  "  An tiphon,"  which  was  a  psalm  executed 
alternately  by  two  choirs.  At  this  early  date  the  antiphon  did  not  exist,  only  the  response 
was  known.  There  must  have  been  a  considerable  number  of  readings,  but  we  are  not  told 
how  many.  The  series  ended  with  a  lection  from  the  Gospel,  which  is  made  not  by  a  reader 
but  by  a  priest  or  deacon.     The  congregation  stands  during  this  lesson. 

When  the  lessons  and  psalmodies  are  done,  the  priests  take  the  word,  each  in  his  turn, 
and  after  them  the  bishop.  The  homily  is  always  preceded  by  a  salutation  to  the  people,  to 
which  they  answer,  "And  with  thy  spirit." 

After  the  sermon  the  sending  out  of  the  different  categories  of  persons  who  should  not 
assist  at  the  holy  Mysteries  takes  place.  First  of  all  the  catechumens.  Upon  the  invitation 
of  the  deacon  they  make  a  prayer  in  silence  while  the  congregation  prays  for  them.  The 
deacon  gives  the  outline  of  this  prayer  by  detailing  the  intentions  and  the  things  to  be 
prayed  for.  The  faithful  answer,  and  especially  the  children,  by  the  supplication  Kyric  clei- 
son.  Then  the  catechumens  rise  up,  and  the  deacon  asks  them  to  join  with  him  in  the 
prayer  which  he  pronounces ;  next  he  makes  them  bow  before  the  bishop  to  receive  his  bene- 
diction, after  which  he  sends  them  home. 

The  same  form  is  used  for  the  energumens,  for  the  competentes,  i.e.,  for  the  catechumens 
who  are  preparing  to  receive  baptism,  and  last  of  all  for  the  penitents. 

When  there  remain  in  the  church  only  the  faithful  communicants,  these  fall  to  prayer  ; 
and  prostrate  toward  the  East  they  listen  while  the  deacon  says  the  litany — "  For  the  peace 
and  good  estate  of  the  world  ;  for  the  holy  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church ;  for  bishops, 
priests  ;  for  the  Church's  benefactors  ;  for  the  neophytes  ;  for  the  sick  ;  for  travellers  ;  for 
little  children  ;  for  those  who  are  erring,"  etc.  And  to  all  these  petitions  is  added  Eyrie 
eleison.  The  litany  ends  with  this  special  form  "  Save  us,  and  raise  us  wp,  O  God,  for  thy 
mercy's  sake."  Then  the  voice  of  the  bishop  rises  in  the  silence — he  pronounces  a  solemn 
prayer  of  a  grave  and  majestic  style. 

Here  ends  the  first  part  of  the  liturgy  ;  that  part  which  the  Church  had  taken  from  the 
old  use  of  the  synagogues.  The  second  part,  the  Christian  liturgy,  properly  so-called,  be- 
gins by  the  salutation  of  the  bishop,  followed  by  the  response  of  the  people.  Then,  at  a  sign 
given  by  a  deacon,  the  clergy  receive  the  kiss  of  peace  from  the  bishop,  and  the  faithful  give 
it  to  each  other,  men  to  men,  women  to  women. 

Then  the  deacons  and  the  other  lower  ministers  divide  themselves  between  watching  and 
serving  at  the  altar.  The  one  division  go  through  the  congregation,  keeping  all  in  their 
proper  place,  and  the  little  children  on  the  outskirts  of  the  sacred  enclosure,  and  watching 
the  door  that  no  profane  person  may  enter  the  church.  The  others  bring  and  set  upon  the 
altar  the  breads  and  the  chalices  prepared  for  the  Sacred  Banquet ;  two  of  them  wave  fans 
backwards  and  forwards  to  protect  the  holy  offerings  from  insects.  The  bishop  washes  his 
hands  and  vests  himself  in  festal  habit ;  the  priests  range  themselves  around  him,  and  all  to- 
gether they  approach  the  altar.  This  is  a  solemn  moment.  After  private  prayer  the  bishop 
makes  the  sign  of  the  cross  upon  his  brow  and  begins, 

"  The  grace  of  God  Almighty,  and  the  love  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  communion 
of  the  Holy  Ghost  be  with  you  always  ! 

"And  with  thy  spirit. 


SYNOD    OF   LAODICEA.     A.D.  343-381  139 

"  Lift  up  your  hearts. 

"  We  lift  them  up  unto  the  Lord. 

"  Let  us  give  thanks  unto  our  Lord. 

"  It  is  meet  and  right  so  to  do. 

"  It  is  very  meet,"  etc. 

And  the  eucharistic  prayer  goes  on  .  .  .  concluding  at  last  with  a  return  to  the  mys- 
terious Sanctuary  where  God  abides  in  the  midst  of  spirits,  where  the  Cherubims  and  the 
Seraphims  eternally  make  heaven  ring  with  the  trisagion. 

Here  the  whole  multitude  of  the  people  lift  up  their  voices  and  joining  their  song  with 
that  of  the  choir  of  Angels,  sing,  "Holy,  Holy,  Holy,"  etc. 

When  the  hymn  is  done  and  silence  returns,  the  bishop  continues  the  interrupted 
eucharistic  prayer. 

"  Thou  truly  art  holy,"  etc.,  and  goes  on  to  commemorate  the  work  of  Redemption,  the 
Incarnation  of  the  Word,  his  mortal  life,  his  passion  ;  now  the  officiant  keeps  close  to  the 
Gospel  account  of  the  last  supper  ;  the  mysterious  words  pronounced  at  first  by  Jesus  on  the 
night  before  his  death  are  heard  over  the  holy  table.  Then,  taking  his  inspiration  from  the 
last  words,  "  Do  this  in  remembrance  of  me,"  the  bishop  develops  the  idea,  recalling  the 
Passion  of  the  Son  of  God,  his  death,  his  resurrection,  his  ascension,  the  hope  of  his  glori- 
ous return,  and  declaring  that  it  is  in  order  to  observe  this  precept  and  make  this  memorial 
that  the  congregation  offers  to  God  this  eucharistic  bread  and  wine.  Finally  he  prays  the 
Lord  to  turn  upon  the  Oblation  a  favourable  regard,  and  to  send  down  upon  it  the  power  of 
his  Holy  Spirit,  to  make  it  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ,  the  spiritual  food  of  his  faithful, 
and  the  pledge  of  their  immortality. 

Thus  ends  the  eucharistic  prayer,  properly  so-called.  The  mystery  is  consummated. 
.  .  .  The  bishop  then  directs  the  prayers  .  .  .  and  when  this  long  prayer  is  fin- 
ished by  a  dosology,  all  the  congregation  answer  "Amen,"  and  thus  ratify  his  acts  of  thanks 
and  intercession. 

After  this  is  said  "Our  Father,"  accompanied  by  a  short  litany.  .  .  .  The  bishop  then 
pronounces  his  benediction  on  the  people. 

The  deacon  awakes  the  attention  of  the  faithful  and  the  bishop  cries  aloud,  "  Holy  things 
for  holy  persons."  And  the  people  answer,  "There  is  one  only  holy,  one  only  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  to  the  glory  of  God  the  Father,"  etc. 

No  doubt  at  this  moment  took  place  the  fraction  of  the  bread,  a  ceremony  which  the 
documents  of  the  fourth  century  do  not  mention  in  express  terms. 

The  communion  then  follows.  The  bishop  receives  first,  then  the  priests,  the  deacons, 
the  sub-deacons,  the  readers,  the  singers,  the  ascetics,  the  deaconesses,  the  virgins,  the 
widows,  the  little  children,  and  last  of  all  the  people. 

The  bishop  places  the  consecrated  bread  in  the  right  hand,  which  is  open,  and  supported 
by  the  left ;  the  deacon  holds  the  chalice — they  drink  out  of  it  directly.  To  each  communi- 
cant the  bishop  says,  "  The  Body  of  Christ "  ;  and  the  deacon  says,  "  The  Blood  of  Christ, 
the  Cup  of  life,"  to  which  the  answer  is  made,  "  Amen." 

During  the  communion  the  singers  execute  Psalm  XXXIII.  [XXXIV.  Heb.  numbering] 
Benedicam  Dominum,  in  which  the  words  "  0,  taste  and  see  how  gracious  the  Lord  is,"  have  a 
special  suitability. 

When  the  communion  is  done,  the  deacon  gives  the  sign  for  prayer,  which  the  bishop 
offers  in  the  name  of  all ;  then  all  bow  to  receive  his  blessing.  Finally  the  deacon  dismisses 
the  congregation,  saying,  "  Go  in  peace."  1 

1  An  interesting  and  instructive  book  has  recently  been  pub-  I  theories  from  Vitringato  Bickell  are  carefully  considered.  The 
lished  on  this  subject  by  P.  E.  Warren,  F.S.A.,  entitled  The  book  is  one  of  the  S.  P.  C.  K.  series,  "Side-lights  of  Church 
Liturgy  and  Ritual  of  the  Ante-Nicene  Church,  in  which  all  the  |  History." 


140 


SYNOD   OF  LAODIOEA.     A.D.  343-381 


CANON   XX. 

It  is  not  right  for  a  deacon  to  sit  in  the  presence  of  a  presbyter,  unless  he  be  bidden 
by  the  presbyter  to  sit  down.  Likewise  the  deacons  shall  have  worship  of  the  sub- 
deacons  and  all  the  [inferior]  clergy. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XX. 
A  deacon  shall  not  sit  down  unless  hidden. 

This  is  another  canon  to  curb  the  ambition 
of  Levites  who  wish  to  take  upon  themselves 
the  honours  of  the  priesthood  also.  Spiritual 
Cores  seem  to  have  been  common  in  early 
times  among  the  deacons  and  this  is  but  one 
of  many  canons  on  the  subject.  Compare 
Canon  XVIII  of  the  Council  of  Nice.  Van 
Espen  points  out  that  in  the  Apostolic  Consti- 
tutions (Lib.  II.,  cap.  lvij),  occurs  the  follow- 
ing passage,  "  Let  the  seat  for  the  bishop  be 


set  in  the  midst,  and  on  each  side  of  him  let 
the  presbyters  sit,  and  let  the  deacons  stand, 
having  their  loins  girded." 

Van  Espen. 
Here  it  should  be  noted,  by  the  way,  that 
in  this  canon  there  is  presented  a  hierarchy 
consisting  of  bishops,  presbyters,  and  deacons 
and  other  inferior  ministers,  each  with  their 
mutual  subordination  one  to  the  other. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Dccrctum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
xciii.,  c.  sv.,  in  Dionysius's  version. 


CANON  XXI. 

The  subdeacons  have  no  right  to  a  place  in  the  Diaconicum,  nor  to  touch  the  Lord's 
vessels. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXI. 

A  subdeacon  shall  not  touch  the  vessels. 

The  "Lord's  vessels  "are  the  chalice  and 
what  we  call  the  sacred  vessels. 


Aeistenus. 

The  ecclesiastical  ministers  shall  not  take 
into  their  hands  the  Lord's  vessels,  but  they 
shall  be  carried  to  the  Table  by  the  priests  or 
deacons. 

Both  Balsamon  and  Zonaras  agree  that  by 
vwepeTcu  is  here  meant  subdeacons. 

Hefele. 
It  is  doubtful  whether  by  diaconkumis  here 
meant  the  place  where  the  deacons  stood  dur- 
ing service,  or  the  diaconicum  generally  so 
called,  which  answers  to  our  sacristy  of  the 
present  day.     In  this  diaconicum  the  sacred 


vessels  and  vestments  were  kept ;  and  as  the 
last  part  of  the  canon  especially  mentions 
these,  I  have  no  doubt  that  the  diaconicum 
must  mean  the  sacristy.  For  the  rest,  this 
canon  is  only  the  concrete  expression  of  the 
rule,  that  the  subdeacons  shall  not  assume 
the  functions  of  the  deacons. 

With  regard  to  the  last  words  of  this 
canon,  Morinus  and  Van  Espen  are  of  opin- 
ion that  the  subdeacons  were  not  altogether 
forbidden  to  touch  the  sacred  vessels,  for  this 
had  never  been  the  case,  but  that  it  was 
intended  that  at  the  solemn  entrance  to  the 
altar,  peculiar  to  the  Greek  service,  the  sacred 
vessels  which  were  then  carried  should  not  be 
borne  by  the  subdeacons. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Dccrctum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
xxiii.,  c.  xxv j. 


CANON  XXII. 

The  subdeacon  has  no  right  to  wear  an  orarium  [i.e.,  stole],  nor  to  leave  the 
doors. 

NOTES. 
Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXII.  The  "orarium"  is  what  we  call  now  the 

A  subdeacon  must  not  wear  an  orarium  nor   stole* 
leave  the  doors.  In  old  times,  so  we  are  told  by  Zonaras 


SYNOD   OF  LAODICEA.     A.D.  343-381 


141 


and  Balsamon,  it  was  the  place  of  the  sub- 
deacons  to  stand  at  the  church  doors  and  to 
bring  in  and  take  out  the  catechumens  and 
the  penitents  at  the  proper  points  in  the 
service.  Zonaras  remarks  that  no  one  need 
be  surprised  if  this,  like  many  other  ancient 
customs,  has  been  entirely  changed  and 
abandoned. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
xxxii.,  canon  xxvij.,  but  reads  Iwstias  instead 
of  ostia,  thus  making  the  canon  forbid  the 
subdeacons  to  leave  the  Hosts  ;  and  to  make 
this  worse  the  ancient  Glossator  adds,  "  but 


the  subdeacon  should  remain  and  consume 
them  with  the  other  ministers."  The  Roman 
Correctors  indeed  note  the  error  but  have  not 
felt  themselves  at  liberty  to  correct  it  on 
account  of  the  authority  of  the  gloss.  Van 
Espen  remarks  "To-day  if  any  Hosts  remain 
which  are  not  to  be  reserved,  the  celebrant 
consumes  them  himself,  but  perchance  in  the 
time  the  gloss  was  written,  it  was  the  custom 
that  the  subdeacons  and  other  ministers  of 
the  altar  were  accustomed  to  do  this,  but 
whenever  the  ministers  present  gradually 
fell  into  the  habit  of  not  receiving  the  sacra- 
ment, this  consumption  of  what  remained 
devolved  upon  the  celebrant." 1 


EXCURSUS  ON  THE  VESTMENTS  OF  THE  EARLY  CHURCH. 

It  would  be  out  of  place  to  enter  into  any  specific  treatment  of  the  different  vestments 
worn  by  the  clergy  in  the  performance  of  their  various  duties.  For  a  full  discussion  of  this 
whole  matter  I  must  refer  my  readers  to  the  great  writers  on  liturgical  and  kindred  matters, 
especially  to  Cardinal  Bona,  Be  Bebus  Liturgkis  ;  Pugin,  Ecclesiastical  Glossary  ;  Rock,  Church 
of  our  Fathers  ;  Hefele,  Seitrage  su  Kircheschichte,  Archdologie  unci  LiturgiJc  (essay  in  Die  Lit- 
urgischen  Gervander,  vol.  ij.,  p.  184  sqq.).  And  I  would  take  this  opportunity  of  warning  the 
student  against  the  entirely  unwarranted  conclusions  of  Durandus's  Bationale  Divinorum 
Officiorum  and  of  Marriott's  Vestiarium  Christianum.  i 

The  manner  in  which  the  use  of  the  stole  is  spoken  of  in  this  canon  shews  not  only  the 
great  antiquity  of  that  vestment  but  of  other  ecclesiastical  vestments  as  well.  Before,  how- 
ever, giving  the  details  of  our  knowledge  with  regard  to  this  particular  vestment  I  shall  need 
no  apology  for  quoting  a  passage,  very  germane  to  the  whole  subject,  from  the  pen  of  that 
most  delightful  writer  Curzon,  to  whose  care  and  erudition  all  scholars  and  students  of 
manuscripts  are  so  deeply  indebted. 

(Robert  Curzon,  Armenia,  p.  202.) 

Here  I  will  remark  that  the  sacred  vestures  of  the  Christian  Church  are  the  same,  with  very 
insignificant  modifications,  among  every  denomination  of  Christians  in  the  world  ;  that  they 
have  always  been  the  same,  and  never  were  otherwise  in  any  country,  from  the  remotest 
times  when  we  have  any  written  accounts  of  them,  or  any  mosaics,  sculptures,  or  pictures  to 
explain  their  forms.  They  are  no  more  a  Popish  invention,  or  have  anything  more  to  do 
with  the  Roman  Church,  than  any  other  usage  which  is  common  to  all  denominations  of 
Christians.  They  are  and  always  have  been,  of  general  and  universal — that  is,  of  Catholic — 
use  ;  they  have  never  been  used  for  many  centuries  for  ornament  or  dress  by  the  laity,  having 
been  considered  as  set  apart  to  be  used  only  by  priests  in  the  church  during  the  celebration 
of  the  worship  of  Almighty  God. 

Thus  far  the  very  learned  Curzon.  As  is  natural  the  distinctive  dress  of  the  bishops  is 
the  first  that  we  hear  of,  and  that  in  connexion  with  St.  John,  who  is  said  to  have  worn  a 
golden  mitre  or  fillet.2 

1  It  is  interesting  to  note  that  the  ancient  custom  is  in  full  use  in  the  Anglican  Church  to-day,  ordered  expressly  by  the  rubrics 
of  the  Prayer  Book. 

3  Eusebius.    Hist,  Eccl,  v.  24. 


142  SYNOD   OP  LAODICEA.     A.D.  343-381 

(Duchesne,  Origines  du  Quite  Chretien,  p.  376  et  sqq.) 

It  was  not  the  bishops  alone  who  were  distinguished  by  insignia  from  the  other  ecclesi- 
astics. Priests  and  deacons  had  their  distinctive  insignia  as  well.  There  was,  however,  a 
difference  between  Rome  and  the  rest  of  the  world  in  this  matter.  At  Rome  it  would  seem 
that  but  little  favour  was  extended  at  first  to  these  marks  of  rank  ;  the  letter  of  Pope  Celes- 
tine  to  the  bishops  shews  this  already.  But  what  makes  it  evident  still  more  clearly,  is  that 
the  ovarium  of  the  priest  and  of  the  deacon,  looked  upon  as  a  visible  and  distinctive  mark  of 
these  orders,  was  unknown  at  Rome,  at  least  down  to  the  tenth  century,  while  it  had  been 
adopted  everywhere  else. 

To  be  sure,  the  ovarium  is  spoken  of  in  the  ordincs  of  the  ninth  century  ;  but  from  these 
it  is  also  evident  that  this  vestment  was  worn  by  acolytes  and  subdeacons,  as  well  as  by  the 
superior  clergy,  and  that  its  place  was  under  the  top  vestment,  whether  dalmatic  or  chasuble, 
and  not  over  it.  But  that  ovarium  is  nothing  more  than  the  ancient  sweat-cloth  (sudarium), 
the  handkerchief,  or  cravat  which  has  ended  up  by  taking  a  special  form  and  even  by  becom- 
ing an  accessory  of  a  ceremonial  vestment :  but  it  is  not  an  insignia.  I  know  no  Roman 
representation  of  this  earlier  than  the  twelfth  century.  The  priests  and  deacons  who  figure 
in  the  mosaics  never  display  this  detail  of  costume. 

But  such  is  not  the  case  elsewhere.  Towards  the  end  of  the  fourth  century,  the  Council 
of  Laodicea  in  Phrygia  forbade  inferior  classes,  subdeacons,  readers,  etc.,  to  usurp  the  ovarium. 
St.  Isidore  of  Pelusium  knew  it  as  somewhat  analogous  to  the  episcopal  pallium,  except  that  it 
was  of  linen,  while  the  pallium  was  of  wool.  The  sermon  on  the  Prodigal  Son,  sometimes 
attributed  to  St.  John  Chrysostom  [Migne's  Ed.,  vol.  viij.,  520],  uses  the  same  term,  696vr]; 
it  adds  that  this  piece  of  dress  was  worn  over  the  left  shoulder,  and  that  as  it  swung  back 
and  forth  it  called  to  mind  the  wings  of  the  angels. 

The  deacons  among  the  Greeks  wear  the  stole  in  this  fashion  down  to  to-day,  perfectly 
visible,  over  the  top  of  the  upper  vestment,  and  fastened  upon  the  left  shoulder.  Its  ancient 
name  (wpapiov)  still  clings  to  it.  As  for  the  ovarium  of  the  priests  it  is  worn,  like  the  stole 
of  Latin  priests,  round  the  neck,  the  two  ends  falling  in  front,  almost  to  the  feet.  This  is 
called  the  epitrachilion  (liriTpayri^iov). 

These  distinctions  were  also  found  in  Spain  and  Gaul.  The  Council  of  Braga,  in  561, 
ordered  that  deacons  should  wear  these  or  aria,  not  under  the  tunicle,  which  caused  them  to 
be  confounded  with  the  subdeacon,  but  over  it,  over  the  shoulder.  The  Council  of  Toledo, 
in  633,  describes  the  ovarium  as  the  common  mark  of  the  three  superior  orders,  bishops, 
priests,  and  deacons ;  and  specifies  that  the  deacon  should  wear  his  over  his  left  shoulder, 
and  that  it  should  be  white,  without  any  mixture  of  colours  or  any  gold  embroidery.  An- 
other Council  of  Braga  forbade  priests  to  say  mass  without  having  a  stole  around  their 
necks  and  crossed  upon  the  breast,  exactly  as  Latin  priests  wear  it  to-day.  St.  Germanus 
of  Paris  speaks  of  the  insignia  of  a  bishop  and  of  a  deacon ;  to  the  first  he  assigns  the 
name  of  pallium,  and  says  that  it  is  worn  around  the  neck,  and  falls  down  upon  the  breast 
where  it  ends  with  a  fringe.  As  for  the  insignia  of  a  deacon  he  calls  it  a  stole  (stola) ;  and 
says  that  deacons  wear  it  over  the  alb.  This  fashion  of  wearing  the  stole  of  the  deacon 
spread  during  the  middle  ages  over  nearly  the  whole  of  Italy  and  to  the  very  gates  of  Rome. 
And  even  at  Rome  the  ancient  usage  seems  to  have  been  maintained  with  a  compromise. 
They  ended  up  by  adopting  the  stole  for  deacons  and  by  placing  it  over  the  left  shoulder,  but 
they  covered  it  up  with  the  dalmatic  or  the  chasuble. 

The  priest's  stole  was  also  accepted  :  and  in  the  mosaics  of  Sta.  Maria  in  Trasterere  is  seen 
a  priest  ornamented  with  this  insignia.  It  is  worthy  of  notice  that  the  four  popes  who  are 
represented  in  the  same  mosaic  wear  the  pallium  but  no  stole.     The  one  seems  to  exclude 


SYNOD   OP   LAODICEA.     A.D.  343-381  143 


the  other.  And  as  a  matter  of  fact  the  ordines  of  the  ninth  century  in  describing  the  costume 
of  the  pope  omit  always  the  stole.  One  can  readily  understand  that  who  bore  one  of  these 
insignia  should  not  wear  the  other. 

However,  they  ended  by  combining  them,  and  at  Ravenna,  where  they  always  had  a  taste 
for  decorations,  bishop  Ecclesius  in  the  mosaics  of  San  Vitale  wears  both  the  priest's  stole 
and  the  Roman  pallium.  This,  however,  seems  to  be  unique,  and  his  successors  have  the  pal- 
lium only.  The  two  are  found  together  again  in  the  Sacramentary  of  Autun  ( Vide  M.  Lelisle's 
reproduction  in  the  Gazette  Archeologique,  1884,  pi.  20),  and  on  the  paliotto  of  St.  Ambrose 
of  Milan  ;  such  seems  to  have  been  the  usage  of  the  Franks. 

In  view  of  these  facts  one  is  led  to  the  conclusion  that  all  these  insignia,  called  pallium, 
omophorion,  ovarium,  stole,  epitrachilion,  have  the  same  origin.  They  are  the  marks  of  dig- 
nity, introduced  into  church  usage  during  the  fourth  century,  analogous  to  those  which  the 
Theodosian  code  orders  for  certain  kinds  of  civil  functionaries.  For  one  reason  or  another 
the  Roman  Church  refused  to  receive  these  marks,  or  rather  confined  itself  to  the  papal  pal- 
lium, which  then  took  a  wholly  technical  signification.  But  everywhere  else,  this  mark  of 
the  then  superior  orders  of  the  hierarchy  was  adopted,  only  varying  slightly  to  mark  the 
degree,  the  deacon  wearing  it  over  the  left  shoulder,  the  bishop  and  priest  around  the  neck, 
the  deacon  over  the  tunicle  which  is  his  uppermost  vestment,  the  priest  under  the  chasuble; 
the  bishop  over  his  chasuble.  ^However,  for  this  distinction  between  a  bishop  and  priest 
we  have  very  little  evidence.  The  Canon  of  III  Braga,  already  cited,  which  prescribes 
that  priests  shall  wear  the  stole  crossed  over  the  breast,  presupposes  that  it  is  worn  under 
the  chasuble,  but  the  council  understands  that  this  method  of  wearing  it  pertains  distinctively 
to  priests,  and  that  bishops  have  another  method  which  they  should  observe  ;  for  the  word 
sacerdotes,  used  by  the  council,  includes  bishops  as  well  as  priests.  The  rest  of  the  Spanish 
ecclesiastical  literature  gives  us  no  information  upon  the  point.  In  Gaul,  St.  Germanus  of 
Paris  (as  we  have  seen)  speaks  of  the  episcopal  pallium  after  having  described  the  chasuble, 
which  makes  one  believe  that  it  was  worn  on  top.  I  have  already  said  that  Bishop  Ecclesius 
of  Ravenna  is  represented  with  the  stole  pendant  before,  under  the  chasuble  and  at  the  same 
time  with  the  pallium  on  top  of  it ;  and  that  this  usage  was  adopted  in  France  in  the  Carlo- 
vingian  times.  Greek  bishops  also  wear  at  the  same  time  the  epitrachilion  and  the  omophor- 
ion. This  accumulation  of  insignia  was  forbidden  in  Spain  in  the  seventh  century  ( Vide  IV 
Toledo,  Canon  XXXIX),  and  (as  we  have  stated)  the  Pope  abstained  from  it  until  about 
the  twelfth  century,  contenting  himself  with  the  pallium  without  adding  to  it  the  stole.* 

The  pallium,  with  the  exception  of  the  crosses  which  adorn  its  ends,  was  always  white ; 
so  too  was  the  deacon's  stole  and  also  that  of  the  priest  and  bishop.  The  pallium  was 
always  and  everywhere  made  of  wool ;  in  the  East  the  deacon's  stole  was  of  linen  ;  I  cannot 
say  of  what  material  the  priest's  and  deacon's  stole  was  in  the  West. 


CANON  XXIII. 

The  readers  and  singers  have  no  right  to  wear  an  orarium,  and  to  read  or  sing  thus 
[habited]. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXIII. 
Cantors  and  lectors  shall  not  wear  the  orarium. 


*  What  follows  down  to  the  next  asterisk  is  a  foot-note  to  p. 
379  of  Duchesne's  book, 


Van  Espen. 


Rightly  Zonoras  here  remarks,  "for  the 
same  reason  (that  they  should  not  seem  to 
wish  to  usurp  a  ministry  not  their  own)  it 


144  SYNOD   OF  LAODICEA.     A.D.  343-381 


is  not  permitted  to  these  to  wear  the  stole, 
for  readers  are  for  the  work  of  reading,  and 
singers  for  singing,"  so  each  one  should  per- 
form his  own  office. 


This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
xxiii.,  can.  xxviij. 


CANON  XXIV. 

No  one  of  the  priesthood,  from  presbyters  to  deacons,  and  so  on  in  the  ecclesiastical 
order  to  subdeacons,  readers,  singers,  exorcists,  door-keepers,  or  any  of  the  class  of  the 
Ascetics,  ought  to  enter  a  tavern. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXIV.  which  contains   exceptions   not  here   speci- 

fied. 


No  clergyman  should  enter  a  tavern. 
Compare  this  with  Apostolic  Canon  LTV, 


This  canon  is  contained  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
xliv.,  c.  ij. 


EXCURSUS  ON  THE  MINOR  ORDERS  OF  THE  EARLY  CHURCH. 

(Lightfoot,  Apostolic  Fathers,  Ignatius,  Vol.  I.,  p.  258.) 

Some  of  these  lower  orders,  the  subdeacons,  readers,  door-keepers,  and  exorcists,  are 
mentioned  in  the  celebrated  letter  of  Cornelius  bishop  of  Rome  (a.d.  251)  preserved  by 
Eusebius  (H.E.,  vi.,  43),  and  the  readers  existed  at  least  half  a  century  earlier  (Tertull.,  cle 
Pracscr.,  41).  In  the  Eastern  Church,  however,  if  we  except  the  Apostolic  Constitutions,  of 
which  the  date  and  country  are  uncertain,  the  first  reference  to  such  offices  is  found  in  a 
canon  of  the  Council  of  Antioch,  a.d.  341,  where  readers,  subdeacons,  and  exorcists,  are 
mentioned,  this  being  apparently  intended  as  an  exhaustive  enumeration  of  the  ecclesiastical 
orders  below  the  diaconate  ;  and  for  the  first  mention  of  door-keepers  in  the  East,  we  must 
go  to  the  still  later  Council  of  Laodicea,  about  a.d.  363,  (see  III.,  p.  240,  for  the  references, 
where  also  fuller  information  is  given).  But  while  most  of  these  lower  orders  certainly 
existed  in  the  "West,  and  probably  in  the  East,  as  early  as  the  middle  of  the  third  century 
the  case  is  different  with  the  "  singers  "  (xpaXrai)  and  the  "  labourers  "  (/<07naTai).  Setting 
aside  the  Apostolic  Constitutions,  the  first  notice  of  the  "  singers  "  occurs  in  the  canons  of 
the  above-mentioned  Council  of  Laodicea.  This,  however,  may  be  accidental.  The  history 
of  the  word  copiatai  affords  a  more  precise  and  conclusive  indication  of  date.  The  term  first 
occurs  in  a  rescript  of  Constantius  (a.d.  357),  "clerici  qui  copiatai  appellantur,"  and  a  little 
later  (a.d.  361),  the  same  emperor  speaks  of  them  as  "hi  quos  copiatas  recens  usus  instituit 
nuncupari." 

(Adolf  Harnack,  in  his  little  book  ridiculously  intituled  in  the  English  version  Sources 
of  the  Apostolic  Canons,  page  85.) 

Exorcists  and  readers  there  had  been  in  the  Church  from  old  times,  subdeacons  are  not 
essentially  strange,  as  they  participate  in  a  name  (deacon)  which  dates  from  the  earliest  days 
of  Christianity.  But  acolytes  and  door-keepers  (mAw/ooi )  are  quite  strange,  are  really  novel- 
ties. And  these  acolytes  even  at  the  time  of  Cornelius  stand  at  the  head  of  the  ordines 
minores :  for  that  the  subdeacons  follow  on  the  deacons  is  self-evident.  Whence  do  they 
come  ?  Now  if  they  do  not  spring  out  of  the  Christian  tradition,  their  origin  must  be 
explained  from  the  Roman.     It  can  in  fact  be  shown  there  with  desirable  plainness. 

With  regard  to  subdeacons  the  reader  may  also  like  to  see  some  of  Harnack's  specula- 
tions.    In  the  volume  just  quoted  he  writes  as  follows  (p.  85  note)  : 

According  to  Cornelius  and  Cyprian  subdeacons  were  mentioned  in  the  thirtieth  canon 


SYNOD   OP  LAODICEA.     A.D.  343-381  145 

of  the  Synod  of  Elvira  (about  305),  so  that  the  sub  diaconate  must  then  have  been  acknowl- 
edged as  a  fixed  general  institution  in  the  whole  west  (see  Dale,  The  Synod  of  Elvira,  Lond., 
1882).  The  same  is  seen  in  the  "gesta  apud  Zenophilum."  As  the  appointment  of  the 
lower  orders  took  place  at  Rome  between  about  the  years  222-249,  the  announcement  in 
the  Liber  Pontificcdis  (see  Duchesne's  edition,  fasc.  2,  1885,  p.  148)  is  not  to  be  despised,  as 
according  to  it  Bishop  Fabian  appointed  seven  subdeacons :  "  Hie  regiones  dividit  dia- 
conibus  et  fecit  vii.  subdiaconos."  The  Codex  Liberianus  indeed  (see  Duchesne,  fasc.  1,  pp. 
4  and  5  ;  Lipsius,  Chronohgie  d.  rom  Bischofe,  p.  267),  only  contains  the  first  half  of  the  sen- 
tence, and  what  the  Liber  Pontif.  has  added  of  the  account  of  the  appointment  of  subdea- 
cons (.  .  .  qui  vii  notariis  imminerent,  ut  gestas  martyrum  in  integro  fideliter  colliger- 
ent)  is,  in  spite  of  the  explanation  of  Duchesne,  not  convincing.  According  to  Probst  and 
other  Catholic  scholars  the  subdiaconate  existed  in  Rome  a  long  time  before  Pabian  (Kireld. 
Disciplin,  p.  109),  but  Hippolytus  is  against  them.  Besides,  it  should  be  observed  that  the 
officials  first,  even  in  Carthage,  are  called  hypo-deacons,  though  the  word  subdiaconus  was 
by  degrees  used  in  the  West.  This  also  points  to  a  Roman  origin  of  the  office,  for  in  the 
Roman  church  in  the  first  part  of  the  third  century  the  Greek  language  was  the  prevailing 
one,  but  not  at  Carthage. 

But  to  return  to  the  Acolythes,  and  door-keepers,  whom  Harnack  thinks  to  be  copies  of 
the  old  Roman  temple  officers.  He  refers  to  Marquardt's  explanation  of  the  sacrificial  sys- 
tem of  the  Romans,  and  gives  the  following  resume  (page  85  ct  scqq.) : 

1.  The  temples  have  only  partially  their  own  priests,  but  they  all  have  a  superintendent 
(cedituus-curator  tempU).  These  ceditui,  who  lived  in  the  temple,  fall  again  into  two  classes. 
At  least  "  in  the  most  important  brotherhoods  the  chosen  cedihius  was  not  in  a  position  to 
undertake  in  person  the  watching  and  cleaning  of  the  saccllum.  He  charged  therefore  with 
this  service  a  freedman  or  slave."  " In  this  case  the  saceUum  had  two  ceditui,  the  temple- 
keeper,  originally  called  magister  cedihius,  and  the  temple-servant,  who  appears  to  be  called 
the  cedihius  minister."  "To  both  it  is  common  that  they  live  in  the  temple,  although  in  small 
chapels  the  presence  of  the  servant  is  sufficient.  The  temple-servant  opens,  shuts,  and  cleans 
the  sacred  place,  and  shows  to  strangers  its  curiosities,  and  cdloivs,  according  to  the  rules  of  the  tem- 
ple, those  persons  to  offer  up  prayers  and  sacrifices  to  whom  this  is  permitted,  while  he  sends  away 
the  others." 

2.  "  Besides  the  endowment,  the  colleges  of  priests  were  also  supplied  with  a  body  of 
servants  " — the  under  officials —  ;  "  they  were  appointed  to  the  priests,  ...  by  all  of 
whom  they  were  used  partly  as  letter-carriers  (tabellarii),  partly  as  scribes,  partly  as  assistants 
at  the  sacrifices."  Marquardt  reckons,  (page  218  and  fol.)  the  various  categories  of  them 
among  the  sacerdotes  publici,  lictores,  pullarii,  victimarii,  tibicines,  viatores,  sixthly  the 
calatores,  in  the  priests'  colleges  free  men  or  freedmen,  not  slaves,  and  in  fact  one  for  the  per- 
sonal service  of  each  member. 

Here  we  have  the  forerunners  of  the  Church  door-keepers  and  acolytes.  Thus  says  the 
fourth  Council  of  Carthage,  as  far  as  refers  to  the  former :  "  Ostiarius  cum  ordinatur,  post- 
quam  ab  archidiacono  instructus  fuerit,  qualiter  in  domo  dei  debeat  conversari,  ad  suggest- 
ionem  archidiaconi,  tradat  ei  episcopus  claves  ecclesise  de  altari,  dicens.  Sic  age,  quasi  reddi- 
turus  deo  rationem  pro  his  rebus,  quse  hisce  clavibus  recluduntur."  The  ostiarius  (7rvAwpos) 
is  thus  the  tedituus  minister.  He  had  to  look  after  the  opening  and  shutting  of  the  doors, 
to  watch  over  the  coming  in  and  going  out  of  the  faithful,  to  refuse  entrance  to  suspicious 
persons,  and,  from  the  date  of  the  more  strict  separation  between  the  missa  catechumenorum 
and  the  missa  fidelium,  to  close  the  doors,  after  the  dismissal  of  the  catechumens,  against 
those  doing  penance  and  unbelievers.  He  first  became  necessary  when  there  were  special 
vol.  xiv.  L 


14G  SYNOD   OF   LAODICEA.     A.D.  343-381 

church  buildings  (there  were  such  even  in  the  second  century),  and  they  like  the  temples, 
together  with  the  ceremonial  of  divine  service,  had  come  to  be  considered  as  holy,  that  is, 
since  about  225.  The  church  acolytes  are  without  difficulty  to  be  recognised  in  the  under 
officials  of  the  priests,  especially  in  the  "  calatores,"  the  personal  servants  of  the  priests. 
According  to  Cyprian  the  acolytes  and  others  are  used  by  preference  as  tabellarii.  Accord- 
ing to  Cornelius  there  were  in  Rome  forty-two  acolytes.  As  he  gives  the  number  of  priests 
as  forty-six,  it  may  be  concluded  with  something  like  certainty  that  the  rule  was  that  the 
number  of  the  priests  and  of  the  acolytes  should  be  equal,  and  that  the  little  difference  may 
have  been  caused  by  temporary  vacancies.  If  this  view  is  correct,  the  identity  of  the  calator 
with  the  acolyte  is  strikingly  proved.  But  the  name  "acolyte"  plainly  shows  the  acolyte 
was  not,  like  the  door-keeper,  attached  to  a  sacred  thing,  but  to  a  sacred  person. 

(Lightfoot.   Apostolic  Fathers.     Ignatius,  ad  Antioch,  xj.,  note.     Vol.  II.,  Sec.  II.,  p.  240.) 

The  acolytes  were  confined  to  the  Western  Church  and  so  are  not  mentioned  here.  On 
the  other  hand  the  "  deaconesses  "  seem  to  have  been  confined  to  the  Eastern  Church  at  this 
time.  See  also  Apost.  Const.,  iii.,  11.  ;  viii.,  12  ;  comp.  viii.,  19-28,  31 ;  Apost.  Can.,  43  ; 
Cone.  Laodie.,  Can.  24;  Cone.  Antioch,  Can.  10.  Of  these  lower  orders  the  "subdeacons" 
are  first  mentioned  in  the  middle  of  the  third  century,  in  the  passage  of  Cornelius  already 
quoted  and  in  the  contemporary  letters  of  Cyprian.  The  "  readers  "  occur  as  early  as  Ter- 
tullian  de  Prcescr.  41  "hodie  diaconus,  qui  eras  lector,"  where  the  language  shows  that  this 
was  already  a  firmly  established  order  in  the  Church.  Of  the  "  singers  "  the  notices  in  the 
Apostolieal  Constitutions  are  probably  the  most  ancient.  The  "door-keepers,"  like  the  sub- 
deacons,  seem  to  be  first  mentioned  in  the  letter  of  Cornelius.  The  KcwruuvTes  first  appear  a 
full  century  later;  see  the  next  note.  The  "  exorcists,"  as  we  have  seen,  are  mentioned  as  a 
distinct  order  by  Cornelius,  while  in  Apost.  Const.,  viii.,  26,  it  is  ordered  that  they  shall  not 
be  ordained,  because  it  is  a  spiritual  function  which  comes  direct  from  God  and  manifests 
itself  by  its  results.  The  name  and  the  function,  however,  appear  much  earlier  in  the  Chris- 
tian Church ;  e.g.,  Justin  Mart.,  Apol.  ii.,  6  (p.  45).  The  forms  eVop/ao-Tjjs  and  e^op/aor^s  are 
convertible;  e.g.,  Justin  Mart.,  Dial.,  85  (p.  311).  The  "confessors"  hardly  deserve  to  be 
reckoned  a  distinct  order,  though  accidentally  they  are  mentioned  in  proximity  with  the 
different  grades  of  clergy  in  Apost.  Const.,  viii.,  12,  already  quoted.  Perhaps  the  accidental 
connexion  in  this  work  has  led  to  their  confusion  with  the  offices  of  the  Christian  ministry 
in  our  false  Ignatius.  In  Apost.  Const.,  viii . ,  23,  they  are  treated  in  much  the  same  way  as 
the  exorcists,  being  regarded  as  in  some  sense  an  order  and  yet  not  subject  to  ordination. 
Possibly,  however,  the  word  o/xoXoyoTal  has  here  a  different  sense,  "  chanters,"  as  the  corre- 
sponding Latin  "  confessores  "  seems  sometimes  to  have,  e.g.,  in  the  Sacramentary  of  Gregory 
"  Oremus  et  pro  omnibus  episcopis,  presbyteris,  diaconibus,  acolythis,  exorcistis,  lectoribus, 
ostiariis,  confessoribus,  virginibus,  viduis,  et  pro  omni  populo  sancto  Dei ; "  see  Ducange, 
Gloss.  Lat.,  s.  v.  (11.  p.  530,  Henschel). 

In  a  law  of  the  year  357  (Cod.  Theod.,  xiii.,  1)  mention  is  made  of  "  clerici  qui  copiatee 
appellantur,"  and  another  law  of  the  year  361  (Cod.  Theod.,  xvi.,  2,  15)  runs  "  clerici  vero  vel 
his  quos  copiatas  recens  usus  instituit  nuncupari,"  etc.  From  these  passages  it  is  clear 
that  the  name  Komwvres  was  not  in  use  much  before  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century,  though 
the  office  under  its  Latin  name  "  fossores  "  or  "  fossarii  "  appears  somewhat  earlier.  Even 
later  Epiphanius  (Expos.  Fid.,  21)  writes  as  if  the  word  still  needed  some  explanation.  In 
accordance  with  these  facts,  Zahn  (I.  v.,  A.  p.  129),  correctly  argues  with  regard  to  our 
Ignatian  writer,  urging  that  on  the  one  hand  he  would  not  have  ascribed  such  language  to 
Ignatius  if  the  word  had  been  quite  recent,  while  on  the  other  hand  his  using  the  participle 
(toi>5  KOTi-idivTa?)  rather  than  the  substantive  indicates  that  it  had  not  yet  firmly  established 


SYNOD   OF  LAODICEA.     A.D.  343-381 


147 


itself.  For  these  "copiatre"  see  especially  de  Rossi,  Roma  Sotteranea,  III.,  p.  533  sq., 
Gothofred  on  God.  Theod.,  II.,  cc,  and  for  the  Latin  "fossores"  Martigny,  Diet,  des  Antiq. 
Ghrtt.  s.v.  See  also  the  inscriptions,  C.  I.  (?.,  9227,  Bull,  de  Corr.  Bellen.,  vii.,  p.  238, 
Journ.  of  Hellen.  Stud.,  vi.,  p.  3G2. 


CANON  XXV. 
A  subdeacon  must  not  give  the  Bread,  nor  bless  the  Cup. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXV. 

A  subdeacon  may  not  give  the  bread  and  the 
cup. 

Aristenus. 

Subdeacons  are  not  allowed  to  perform  the 
work  of  presbyters  and  deacons.  Wherefore 
they  neither  deliver  the  bread  nor  the  cup  to 
the  people. 

Hefele. 

According  to  the  Apostolic  Constitutions, 
the  communion  was  administered  in  the  fol- 
lowing manner  :  the  bishop  gave  to  each  the 
holy  bread  with  the  words  :  "  the  Body  of  the 
Lord,"  and  the  recipient  said,  "  Amen,"     The 


deacon  then  gave  the  chalice  with  the  words : 
"the  Blood  of  Christ,  the  chalice  of  life,"  and 
the  recipient  again  answered,  "  Amen."  This 
giving  of  the  chalice  with  the  words  :  "  the 
Blood  of  Christ,"  etc.,  is  called  in  the  canon  of 
Laodicea  a  "  blessing  "  (evkoyew).  The  Greek 
commentator  Aristenus  in  accordance  with 
this,  and  quite  rightly,  gives  the  meaning  of 
this  canon. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
XCIII.,  c.  xix.  ;  but  reads  "Deacons"  instead 
of  "Subdeacons."  The  Roman  Correctors 
point  out  the  error. 


CANON  XXVI. 

They  who  have  not  been  promoted  [to  that  office]  by  the  bishop,  ought  not  to  adjure, 
either  in  churches  or  in  private  houses. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXVI. 


No  one  shall  adjure  without  the  bishop's  pro- 
motion to  that  office. 

Balsamon. 

Some  were  in  the  habit  of  "  adjuring,"  that 
is  catechising  the  unbelievers,  who  had  never 
received  the  imposition  of  the  bishop's  hands 
for  that  purpose  ;  and  when  they  were  accused 
of  doing  so,  contended  that  as  they  did  not  do 
it  in  church  but  only  at  home,  they  could  not 
be  considered  as  deserving  of  any  punishment. 
For  this  reason  the  Fathers  rule  that  even  to 
"adjure"  (ec^opKi'^civ)  is  an  ecclesiastical  minis- 
try, and  must  not  be  executed  by  anyone  who 
shall  not  have  been  promoted  thereto  by  a 
bishop.  But  the  "  Exorcist  "  must  be  excepted 
who  has  been  promoted  by  a  Chorepiscopus, 
for  he  can  indeed  properly  catechize  although 
not  promoted  by  a  bishop  ;  for  from  Canon 
X.  of  Antioch  we  learn  that  even  a  Chorepis- 
copus can  make  an  Exorcist. 


Zonaras  notes  that  from  this  canon  it  ap- 
pears that  "  Chorepiscopi  are  considered  to  be 
in  the  number  of  bishops." 

Van  Espen. 

"Promoted"  (Trpoa^eWa?)  by  the  bishops, 
by  which  is  signified  a  mere  designation  or 
appointment,  in  confoi'mity  with  the  Greek 
discipline  which  never  counted  exorcism 
among  the  orders,  but  among  the  simple 
ministries  which  were  committed  to  certain 
persons  by  the  bishops,  as  Morinus  proves  at 
length  in  his  work  on  Orders  (De  Ordinationi- 
bus,  Pars  III.,  Ex.  XIV,  cap.  ij.). 

Double  is  the  power  of  devils  over  men,  the 
one  part  internal  the  other  external.  The 
former  is  when  they  hold  the  soul  captive  by 
vice  and  sin.  The  latter  when  they  disturb 
the  exterior  and  interior  senses  and  lead  any- 
one on  to  fury.  Those  who  are  subject  to 
the  interior  evils  are  the  Catechumens  and 
Penitents,  and  those  who  are  subject  to  the 
exterior  are  the  Energumens,    Whoever  are 


L  3 


148 


SYNOD    OF   LAODICEA.     A.D.  343-381 


occupied  with  the  freeing  from  the  power  of 
the  devil  of  either  of  these  kinds,  by  prayers, 
exhortations,  and  exorcisms,  are  said  "  to 
exorcize "  them  ;  which  seems  to  be  what 
Balsamon  means  when  he  says — "  '  exorcize  ' 
that  is  '  to  catechize  the  unbelievers.' "    Vide 


this    matter    more  at  length    in   Ducange's 
Glossary  (Gloss.,  s.  v.  Exorcizare). 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
LXIX.  c.  ij.,  Isidore's  version, 


CANON  XXVII. 

Neither  they  of  the  priesthood,  nor  clergymen,  nor  laymen,  who  are  invited  to  a  love 
feast,  may  take  away  their  portions,  for  this  is  to  cast  reproach  on  the  ecclesiastical 
order. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XXVII. 

A  clergyman  invited  to  a  love  feast  shall  carry 
nothing  away  xoith  him  ;  for  this  ivould  bring 
his  order  into  shame. 

Hefele. 

Van  Espen  translates  :  "no  one  holding 
any  office  in  the  Church,  be  he  cleric  or  lay- 
man," and  appeals  to  the  fact  that  already  in 
early  times  among  the  Greeks  many  held 
offices  in  the  Church  without  being  ordained, 
as  do  now  our  sacristans  and  acolytes.  I  do 
not  think,  however,  with  Van  Espen,  that  by 
"  they  of  the  priesthood  "  is  meant  in  general 
any  one  holding  office  in  the  Church,  but  only 


the  higher  ranks  of  the  clergy,  priests  and 
deacons,  as  in  the  preceding  twenty-fourth 
canon  the  presbyters  and  deacons  alone  are 
expressly  numbered  among  the  kpariKois  and 
distinguished  from  the  other  (minor)  clerics. 
And  afterwards,  in  canon  XXX.,  there  is  a 
similar  mention  of  three  different  grades, 
lepaTiKoi,  kXijpikol,  and  dcjKijTOu. 

The  taking  away  of  the  remains  of  the  agape 
is  here  forbidden,  because,  on  the  one  hand, 
it  showed  covetousness,  and,  on  the  other,  was 
perhaps  considered  a  profanation. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
XLII.,  c.  iij. 


CANON  XXVIII. 

It  is  not  permitted  to  hold  love  feasts,  as  they  are  called,  in  the  Lord's  Houses,  or 
Churches,  nor  to  eat  and  to  spread  couches  in  the  house  of  God. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XXVIII. 
Beds  shall  not  be  set  up  in  churches,   nor 
shall  love  feasts  be  held  there. 

Hefele. 

Eusebius  (H.  K,  Lib.  IX.,  Cap.  X.)  employs 
the  expression  KvpiaKa.  in  the  same  sense  as 
does  this  canon  as  identical  with  churches. 
The  prohibition  itself,  however,  here  given,  as 
well  as  the  preceding  canon,  proves  that  as 


early  as  the  time  of  the  Synod  of  Laodicea, 
many  irregularities  had  crept  into  the  agape. 
For  the  rest,  this  Synod  was  not  in  a  position 
permanently  to  banish  the  usage  from  the 
Church  ;  for  which  reason  the  Trullan  Synod 
in  its  seventy-fourth  canon  repeated  this  rule 
word  for  word. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist, 
XLII,  c.  iv, 


CANON  XXIX. 

Christians  must  not  judaize  by  resting  on  the  Sabbath,  but  must  work  on  that  day, 
rather  honouring  the  Lord's  Day  ;  and,  if  they  can,  resting  then  as  Christians.  But  if 
amr  shall  be  found  to  be  iudaizers,  let  them  be  anathema  from  Christ, 


any  shall  be  found  to  be  judaizers 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXIX. 
A  Christian  shall  not  stop  work  on  the  Sab- 
bath, but  on  the  Lord's  Day. 


NOTES. 

Balsamon. 
Here  the  Fathers  order  that  no  one  of  the 
faithful  shall  stop  work  on  the  Sabbath  as  do 


SYNOD   OF   LAODICEA.     A.D.  343-381 


149 


the  Jews,  but  that  they  should  honour  the 
Lord's  Day,  on  account  of  the  Lord's  resurrec- 
tion, and  that  on  that  day  they  should  abstain 
from  manual  labour  and  go  to  church.  But 
thus  abstaining  from  work  on  Sunday  they  do 


not  lay  down  as  a  necessity,  but  they  add, 
"  if  they  can."  For  if  through  need  or  any 
other  necessity  any  one  worked  on  the  Lord's 
day  this  was  not  reckoned  against  him. 


CANON  XXX. 

None  of  the  priesthood,  nor  clerics  [of  lower  rank]  nor  ascetics,  nor  any  Christian 
or  layman,  shall  wash  in  a  bath  Avith  women ;  for  this  is  the  greatest  reproach  among 
the  heathen. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXX. 

It  is  an  abomination  to  bathe  with  women. 

This  canon  was  renewed  by  the  Synod  in 
Trullo,  canon  lxxvij. 

Zonaras  explains  that  the  bathers  were  en- 


tirely nude  and  hence   arose   the  objection 
which  was  also  felt  by  the  heathen. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
LXXXI.,  c.  xxviij. 


CANON  XXXI. 

It  is  not  lawful  to  make  marriages  with  all  [sorts  of]  heretics,  nor  to  give  our  sons 
and  daughters  to  them ;  but  rather  to  take  of  them,  if  they  promise  to  become  Christians. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXXI. 
It  is  not  right  to  give  children  in  marriage  to 
heretics,  but  they  should  be  received   if  they 
promise  to  become  Christians. 

Van  Espen. 
By  this  canon  the  faithful  are  forbidden  to 


contract  marriage  with  heretics  or  to  join  their 
children  in  such  ;  for,  as  both  Balsamon  and 
Zonaras  remark,  "  they  imbue  them  with  their 
errors,  and  lead  them  to  embrace  their  own 
perverse  opinions." 


CANON  XXXII. 

./ 
It  is  unlawful  to  receive  the  eulogiae  of  heretics,  for  they  are  rather  aXoyiai  [i.e.,  fol- 
lies], than  eulogiae  [i.e.,  blessings]. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXXII. 
The  blessings  of  heretics  are  cursings. 


To  keep  the  Latin  play  upon  the  words 


the  translator  has   used    bene-dictioncs    and  II.,  Quaest.  I.,  Can.  lxvj 


male-dictiones,  but  at  the  expense  of  the  ac- 
curacy of  translation. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 


CANON  XXXIII. 

No  one  shall  join  in  prayers  with  heretics  or  schismatics. 


NOTES 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXXIII.         i 
Thou  shall  not  pray  with  heretics  or  schis 


Van  Espen. 


matics 


The  underlying  principle  of  this  canon  is 
the  same  as  the  last,  for  as  the  receiving  of 


150 


SYNOD   OF   LAODICEA.     A.D.  343-381 


the  Eulogize  which  were  sent  by  heretics  as  a 
sign  of  communion,  signified  a  communion 
with  them  in  religious  matters,  so  the  sharing 
with  them  common  prayer  is  a  declaration  of 


the  same  communion,  and  therefore  to  be 
avoided.  This  is  also  set  forth  in  Apostolical 
Canon  number  xlv. 


CANON  XXXIV. 

No  Christian  shall  forsake  the  martyrs  of  Christ,  and  turn  to  false  martyrs,  that  is, 
to  those  of  the  heretics,  or  those  who  formerly  were  heretics  ;  for  they  are  aliens  from 
God.     Let  those,  therefore,  who  go  after  them,  be  anathema. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXXIV. 

Wlwso  honours  an  heretical  pseudo-martyr  let 
him  be  anathema. 

Hefele. 

This  canon  forbids  the  honouring  of  mar- 
tyrs not  belonging  to  the  orthodox  church. 
The  number  of  Montanist  martyrs  of  Phrygia 
was  probably  the  occasion  of  this  canon. 


The  phrase  which  I  have  translated  "to 
those  who  formerly  were  heretics  "  has  caused 
great  difficulty  to  all  translators  and  scarcely 
two  agree.  Hammond  reads  "  those  who  have 
been  reputed  to  have  been  heretics  ; "  and  with 
him  Fulton  agrees,  but  wrongly  (as  I  think) 
by  omitting  the  "to."  Lambert  translates 
"to  those  who  before  were  heretics"  and  cor- 
rectly. With  him  agrees  Van  Espen,  thus,  vel 
cos  qui  prius  herctici  fuere. 


CANON  XXXV. 

Cheistians  must  not  forsake  the  Church  of  God,  and  go  away  and  invoke  angels 
and  gather  assemblies,  which  things  are  forbidden.  If,  therefore,  any  one  shall  be 
found  engaged  in  this  covert  idolatry,  let  him  be  anathema ;  for  he  has  forsaken  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  and  has  gone  over  to  idolatry. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXXV. 
Whoso  calls  assemblies  in  opposition  to  those 
of  the  Church  and  names  angels,  is  near  to  idol- 
atry and  let  him  be  anathema. 

Van  Espen. 

Whatever  the  worship  of  angels  condemned 
by  this  canon  may  have  been,  one  thing  is 
manifest,  that  it  was  a  species  of  idolatry,  and 
detracted  from  the  worship  due  to  Christ. 

Theodoret  makes  mention  of  this  supersti- 
tious cult  in  his  exposition  of  the  text  of  St. 
Paul,  Col.  ii.,  18,  and  when  writing  of  its 
condemnation  by  this  synod  he  says,  "  they 
were  leading  to  worship  angels  such  as  were 
defending  the  Law ;  for,  said  they,  the  Law 
was  given  through  angels.  And  this  vice 
lasted  for  a  long  time  in  Phrygia  and  Pisidia. 
Therefore  it  was  that  the  synod  which  met  at 
Laodicea  in  Phrygia,  prohibited  by  a  canon, 
that  prayer  should  be  offered  to  angels,  and 
even  to-day  an  oratory  of  St.  Michael  can  be 
seen  among  them,  and  their  neighbours." 

In  the  Capitular  of  Charlemagne,  a.d  789 


(cap.  xvi.),  it  is  said,  "In  that  same  council 
(Laodicea)  it  was  ordered  that  angels  should 
not  be  given  unknown  names,  and  that  such 
should  not  be  affixed  to  them,  but  that  only 
they  should  be  named  by  the  names  which 
we  have  by  authority.  These  are  Michael, 
Gabriel,  Raphael."  And  then  is  subjoined 
the  present  canon.  The  canon  forbids  "  to 
name  "  (6vop,6.£,uv)  angels,  and  this  was  under- 
stood as  meaning  to  give  them  names  instead 
of  to  call  upon  them  by  name. 

Perchance  the  authors  of  the  Capitular  had 
in  mind  the  Roman  Council  under  Pope 
Zachary,  a.d.  745,  against  Aldebert,  who  was 
found  to  invoke  by  name  eight  angels  in  his 
prayers. 

It  should  be  noted  that  some  Latin  ver- 
sions of  great  authority  and  antiquity  read 
angulos  for  angclos.  This  would  refer  to  do- 
ing these  idolatrous  rites  in  corners,  hiddenly, 
secretly,  occulte  as  in  the  Latin.  But  this 
reading,  though  so  respectable  in  the  Latin, 
has  no  Greek  authority  for  it. 


SYNOD    OF   LAOBICEA.     A.D.  343-381 


151 


This  canon  has  often  been  used  in  contro- 
versy as  condemning  the  cultus  which  the 
Catholic  Church  has  always  given  to  the  an- 
gels, but  those  who  would  make  such  a  use 
of  this  canon  should  explain  how  these  inter- 
pretations can  be  consistent  with  the  cultus 


of  the  Martyrs  so  evidently  approved  by  the 
same  council ;  and  how  this  canon  came  to  be 
accepted  by  the  Fathers  of  the  Second  Coun- 
cil of  Nice,  if  it  condemned  the  then  universal 
practice  of  the  Church,  East  and  West.  Cf. 
Forbes,  Considerationcs  Modestce. 


CANON  XXXVI. 

They  who  are  of  the  priesthood,  or  of  the  clergy,  shall  not  be  magicians,  enchant- 
ers, mathematicians,  or  astrologers ;  nor  shall  they  make  what  are  called  amulets,  which 
are  chains  for  their  own  souls.  And  those  who  wear  such,  we  command  to  be  cast  out 
of  the  Church. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXXVI. 

Whoso  will  be  priest  must  not  be  a  magician, 
nor  one  ivho  uses  incantations,  or  mathematical 
or  astrological  charms,  nor  a  putter  on  of  amulets. 

Some  interesting  and  valuable  information 
on  charms  will  be  found  in  Ducange  (Glossa- 
rium,  s.  v.  Phylacterea). 

Balsamon. 

"  Magicians  "  are  those  who  for  any  pur- 
pose call  Satan  to  their  aid.  "  Enchantors  " 
are  those  who  sing  charms  or  incantations, 
and  through  them   draw   demons    to   obey 


them.  "  Mathematicians  "  are  they  who  hold 
the  opinion  that  the  celestial  bodies  rule  the 
universe,  and  that  all  earthly  things  are  ruled 
by  their  influence.  "  Astrologers  "  are  they 
who  divine  by  the  stars  through  the  agency  of 
demons,  and  place  their  faith  in  them. 

Van  Espen. 

Zonaras  also  notes  that  the  science  of 
mathematics  or  astronomy  is  not  at  all  hereby 
forbidden  to  the  clergy,  but  the  excess  and 
abuse  of  that  science,  which  even  more  easily 
may  happen  in  the  case  of  clergymen  and 
consecrated  persons  than  in  that  of  laymen. 


CANON  XXXVII. 

It  is  not  lawful  to  receive  portions  sent  from  the  feasts  of  Jews  or  heretics,  nor  to 
feast  together  with  them. 

CANON  XXXVIII. 

It  is  not  lawful  to  receive  unleavened  bread  from  the  Jews,  nor  to  be  partakers  of  their 
impiety. 

CANON  XXXIX. 

It  is  not  lawful  to  feast  together  with  the  heathen,  and  to  be  partakers  of  their  god- 
lessness. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canons  XXXVII., 
XXXVIII.  and  XXXIX. 

Tlwu  shall   not  keep  feaxts    with   Hebrews 


Apostles,   and   Canon   lx1  of   the   Synod  of 
Carthage. 

Aristenus. 

Light  hath  no  communion  with  darkness. 


or  heretics,  nor  receive  festival  offerings  from  r,  ,  ,  .       . 

tnem  Therefore  no    Christian    should    celebrate    a 


Balsamon. 
Read  canon  lxx.  and  canon  lxxj.  of  the  Holy 


feast  with  heretics  or  Jews,  neither  should  he 
receive  anything  connected  with  these  feasts 
such  as  azymes  and  the  like. 


1  So  both  Zonaras  and  Balsamon  give  the  number,  but  in  this  they  follow  the  Latin  numbers  of  the  African  Code,  the  Greek 
number  is  lxiij. 


152 


SYNOD   OF   LAODICEA.     A.D.  343-381 


CANON  XL. 

Bishops  called  to  a  synod  must  not  be  guilty  of  contempt,  but  must  attend,  and  either 
teach,  or  be  taught,  for  the  reformation  of  the  Church  and  of  others.  And  if  such  an 
one  shall  be  guilty  of  contempt,  he  will  condemn  himself,  unless  he  be  detained  by  ill 
health. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XL. 


Whoso  summoned  to  a  synod  shall  spurn  the 
invitation,  unless  hindered  by  the  force  of 'cir- 
cumstances, shall  not  be  free  from  blame. 

Hefele. 

By  avujxaXia,  illness  is  commonly  under- 
stood,   and  Dionysius   Exiguus   and  Isidore 


translated  it,  the  former  ceyritudinem,  and  the 
latter  infirmitatem.  But  Balsamon  justly  re- 
marks that  the  term  has  a  wider  meaning, 
and,  besides  cases  of  illness  includes  other 
unavoidable  hinderances  or  obstacles. 

This  Canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
XVIII.,  c.  v. 


CANON  XLI. 

None  of  the  priesthood  nor  of  the  clergy  may  go  on  a  journey,  without  the  bidding 
of  the  Bishop. 

CANON  XLII. 

None  of  the  priesthood  nor  of  the  clergy  may  travel  without  letters  canonical. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  or  Canons  XLI.  and  XLII. 

No  clergyman  shall  undertake  a  journey  with- 
out canonical  letters  or  unless  he  is  ordered  to  do 

so. 

Van  Espen 

(On  Canon  xli.) 
It  is  well  known  that  according  to  the 
true  discipline  of  the  Church  no  one  should 
be  ordained  unless  he  be  attached  to  some 
church,  which  as  an  ecclesiastical  soldier  he 
shall  fight  for  and  preserve.  As,  then,  a  secu- 
lar soldier  cannot  without  his  prefect's  bidding 
leave  his  post  and  go  to  another,  so  the  canons 
decree  that  no  one  in  the  ranks  of  the  ecclesi- 
astical military  can  travel  about  except  at  the 
bidding  of  the  bishop  who  is  in  command  of 
the  army.  A  slight  trace  of  this  discipline  is 
observed  even  to-day  in  the  fact  that  priests 
of  other  dioceses  are  not  allowed  to  celebrate 
unless  they  are  provided  with  Canonical  let- 
ters or  testimonials  from  their  own  bishops. 


(On  Canon  xlii.) 

The  whole  subject  of  Commendatory  and 
other  letters  is  treated  of  in  the  note  to 
Canon  VIII.  of  the  Council  of  Antioch. 

Canon  xlj.  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  III.,  Dist. 
V,  De  Consecrat,  can.  xxxvj. 

Canon  xli j .  is  appended  to  the  preceding,  but, 
curiously  enough,  limited  to  laymen,  reading 
as  follows:  "a  layman  also  without  canonical 
J  letters,"  that  is  "formed  letters,"  should  not 
travel  anywhere.    The  Roman  Correctors  re- 
:  mark  that  in  the  Greek  order  this  last  is  canon 
!  xli.,  and  the  former  part  of  Gratian's  canon, 
canon  xlij.  of  the  Greek,  but  such  is  not  the  or- 
der of  the  Greek  in  Zonaras  nor  in  Balsamon. 
The  correctors  add  that  in  neither  canon  is 
there  any   mention   made  of  laymen,  nor  in 
Dionysius's  version  ;  the  Prisca,  however,  read 
for  canon  xlj.,   "  It  is  not  right  for  a  minister 
of  the  altar,  even  for  a  layman,  to  travel,  etc." 


CANON  XLIIL 

The  subdeacons  may  not  leave  the  doors  to  engage  in  the  prayer,  even  for  a  short 
time. 


SYNOD   OF  LAODIOEA.     A.D.  343-381 


153 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XLIII. 


A  subdeacon  should  not  leave  the  gates,  even 
for  a  short  time,  to  pray. 

On  this  canon  the  commentators  find  noth- 
ing to  say  in  addition  to  their  remarks  on 
Canons  xxj.,  and  xxij.,  except  that  the 
"  prayer  "  is  not  their  own  private  prayer,  but 
the  prayer  of  the  Liturgy.  It  has  struck  me 
that  possibly  when  there  was  no  deacon  to 


sing  the  litany  outside  the  Holy  Gates  while 
the  priest  was  going  on  with  the  holy  action 
within,  subdeacons  may  have  left  their  places 
at  the  doors,  assumed  the  deacon's  stole  and 
done  his  part  of  the  office,  and  that  it  was 
to  prevent  this  abuse  that  this  canon  was 
enacted,  the  "  prayer  "  being  the  litany.  But 
as  this  is  purely  my  own  suggestion  it  is 
probably  valueless. 


CANON  XLIV. 


Women  may  not  go  to  the  altar. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XLIV. 
The  altar  must  not  be  approached  by  ivomen. 

Van  Espen. 

The  discipline  of  this  canon  was  often 
renewed  even  in  the  Latin  Church,  and  there- 
fore Balsamon  unjustly  attacks  the  Latins 
when  he  says  ;  "  Among  the  Latins  women 
go  without  any  shame  up  to  the  altar  whenever 
they  wish."  For  the  Latins  have  forbidden 
and  do  forbid  this  approach  of  women  to  the 


altar  no  less  than  the  Greeks  ;  and  look  upon 
the  contrary  custom  as  an  abuse  sprung  of 
the  insolence  of  the  women  and  of  the  negli- 
gence of  bishops  and  pastors. 

ZONAKAS. 

If  it  is  prohibited  to  laymen  to  enter  the 
Sanctuary  by  the  lxixth  canon  of  the  Sixth 
synod  [i.e.  Quinisext],  much  more  are  women 
forbidden  to  do  so  who  are  unwillingly  indeed, 
but  yet  truly,  polluted  by  the  monthly  flux 
of  blood. 


CANON  XLV. 

[Candidates]  for  baptism  are  not  to  be  received  after  the  second  week  in  Lent. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XLV. 


After  two  weeks  of  Lent  no  one  must  be  ad- 
mitted for  illumination,  for  all  such  should  fast 
from  its  beginning. 

Van  Espen. 

To  the  understanding  of  this  canon  it  must 
be  remembered  that  such  of  the  Gentiles  as 
desired  to  become  Catholics  and  to  be  bap- 
tized, at  first  were  privately  instructed  by  the 
catechists.  After  this,  having  acquired  some 
knowledge  of  the  Christian  religion,  they 
were  admitted  to  the  public  instructions 
given  by  the  bishop  in  church ;  and  were 
therefore  called  Audientes  and  for  the  first 
time  properly-speaking  Catechumens.  But 
when  these  catechumens  had  been  kept  in 
this  rank  a  sufficient  time  and  had  been  there 


to  the 


tried,   they  were    allowed   to   go  up 
higher  grade  called  Genuflcctentes. 

And  when  their  exercises  had  been  com- 
pleted in  this  order  they  were  brought  by 
the  catechists  who  had  had  the  charge  of 
them,  to  the  bishop,  that  on  the  Holy  Sab- 
bath [Easter  Even]  they  might  receive  bap- 
tism, and  the  catechumens  gave  their  names  at 
the  same  time,  so  that  they  might  be  set  down 
!  for  baptism  at  the  coming  Holy  Sabbath. 

Moreover   we    learn    from    St.    Augustine 
'  (Serm.  xiii.,  Ad  Neophitos,)  that  the  time  for 
the  giving  in  of  the  names  was  the  beginning 
of  Lent. 

This  council  therefore  in  this  canon  decrees 
that  such  as  do  not  hand  in  their  names  at  the 
beginning  of  Lent,  but  after  two  weeks  are 
past,  shall  not  be  admitted  to  baptism  on  the 
next  Holy  Sabbath. 


154 


SYNOD   OF  LAODICEA.     A.D.  343-381 


CANON  XL VI. 

They  who  are  to  be  baptized  must  learn  the  faith  [Creed]  by  heart,  and  recite  it  to 
the  bishop,  or  to  the  presbyters,  on  the  fifth  day  of  the  week. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  or  Canon  XL VI. 

Vide  infra. 

Hepele. 

It  is  doubtful  whether  by  the  Thursday  of 
the  text  was  meant  only  the  Thursday  of  Holy 
Week,  or  every  Thursday  of  the  time  during 


which  the  catechumens  received  instruction. 
The  Greek  commentators  are  in  favour  of  the 
latter,  but  Dionysius  Exiguus  and  Isidore, 
and  after  them  Bingham,  are,  and  probably 
rightly,  in  favour  of  the  former  meaning. 
This  canon  was  repeated  by  the  Trullan  Synod 
in  its  seventy-eighth  canon. 


CANON  XLVII. 

They  who  are  baptized  in  sickness  and  afterwards  recover,  must  learn  the  Creed  by 
heart  and  know  that  the  Divine  gifts  have  been  vouchsafed  them. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canons  XLVI.  and  XLVII. 

Whoso  is  baptised  by  a  bishop  or  presbyter  let 
him  recite  the  faith  on  the  fifth  feria  of  the 
week.  Also  anyone  baptized  clinically  a  short 
while  afterwards, 

Balsamon. 

Some  unbelievers  were  baptized  before  they 
had  been  catechized,  by  reason  of  the  urgency 
of  the  illness.  Now  some  thought  that  as 
their  baptism  did  not  follow  their  being  cate- 


chumens, they  ought  to  be  catechized  and 
baptized  over  again.  And  in  support  of  this 
opinion  they  urged  Canon  XII.  of  Neocpesarea, 
which  does  not  permit  one  clinically  baptized 
to  become  a  priest  rashly.  For  this  reason  it 
is  that  the  Fathers  decree  that  such  an  one 
shall  not  be  baptized  a  second  time,  but  as 
soon  as  he  gets  well  he  shall  learn  the  faith 
and  the  mystery  of  baptism,  and  to  appreciate 
the  divine  gifts  he  has  received,  viz.,  the  con- 
fession of  the  one  true  God  and  the  remission 
of  sins  which  comes  to  us  in  holy  baptism. 


CANON  XLVIII. 

They  who  are  baptized  must  after  Baptism  be  anointed  with  the  heavenly  chrism, 
and  be  partakers  of  the  Kingdom  of  Christ. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XLVIII. 

Those  illuminated  should  after  their  baptism 
be  anointed. 

Van  Espen. 

That  this  canon  refers  to  the  anointing  with 
chrism  on  the  forehead  of  the  baptized,  that 
is  to  say  of  the  sacrament  of  confirmation,  is 
the  unanimous  opinion  of  the  Greek  commen- 
tators, and  Balsamon  notes  that  this  anointing 
is  not  simply  styled  "  chrism  "  but  "the  heav- 
enly chrism,"  viz. :  "  that  which  is  sanctified 
by  holy  prayers  and  through  the  invocation  of 
the  Holy  Spirit ;  and  those  who  are  anointed 
therewith,  it  sanctifies  and  makes  partakers 
of  the  kingdom  of  heaven." 


Aubespine. 

(Lib.  i.,  Observat.  cap.  xv.) 

Formerly  no  one  was  esteemed  worthy  of 
the  name  Christian  or  reckoned  among  the 
perfect  who  had  not  been  confirmed  and  en- 
dowed with  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

The  prayers  for  the  consecration  of  the 
Holy  Chrism  according  to  the  rites  of  the 
East  and  of  the  West  should  be  carefully  read 
by  the  student.  Those  of  the  East  are  found 
in  the  Euchologion,  and  those  of  the  West  in 
the  Pontificale  Romanian,  De  Officio  in  feria 
v.  Ccena  Domini. 


SYNOD   OF   LAODICEA.     A.D.  343-381 


155 


CANON  XLIX. 

During  Lent  the  Bread  must  not  be  offered  except  on  the  Sabbath  Day  and  on  the 
Lord's  Day  only. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XLIX. 

In  Lent  the  offering  should  be  made  only  on 
the  Sabbath  and  on  the  Lord's  day. 

Heeele. 

This  canon,  which  was  repeated  by  the 
Trullan  Synod  in  its  fifty-second  canon,  or- 
ders that  on  ordinary  week  days  during  Lent, 
only  a  Missa  Prcesanctificatorum  should  take 
place,  as  is  still  the  custom  with  the  Greeks 
on  all  days  of  penitence  and  mourning,  when 


it  appears  to  them  unsuitable  to  have  the  full 
liturgy,  and  as  Leo  Allatius  says,  for  this 
reason,  that  the  consecration  is  a  joyful  act. 
A  comparison  of  the  above  sixteenth  canon, 
however,  shows  that  Saturday  was  a  special 
exception. 

To  the  Saturdays  and  Sundays  mentioned 
by  Hefele  must  be  added  the  feast  of  the 
Annunciation,  which  is  always  solemnized  with 
a  full  celebration  of  the  Liturgy,  even  when 
it  falls  upon  Good  Fridaj^, 


CANON  L. 

The  fast  must  not  be  broken  on  the  fifth  day  of  the  last  week  in  Lent  [i.e.,  on 
Maunday  Thursday],  and  the  whole  of  Lent  be  dishonoured  ;  but  it  is  necessary  to  fast 
during  all  the  Lenten  season  by  eating  only  dry  meats. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  L. 


It  is  not  right  on  the  fifth  feria  of  the  last 
week  of  Lent  to  break  the  fast,  and  thus  spoil 
the  whole  of  Lent ;  but  the  whole  of  Lent  should 
be  kept  with  fasting  on  dry  food. 

That  long  before  the  date  of  the  Quinisext 
Synod'  the  fasting  reception  of  the  Holy 
Eucharist  was  the  universal  law  of  the  Church 
no  one  can  doubt  who  has  devoted  the  slight- 
est study  to  the  point.  To  produce  the  evi- 
dence here  would  be  out  of  place,  but  the 
reader  may  be  referred  to  the  excellent  pres- 
entation of  it  in  Cardinal  Bona's  De  Rebus 
Liturgicis. 

I  shall  here  cite  but  one  passage,  from  St. 
Augustine : 

"  It  is  clear  that  when  the  disciples  first  re- 
ceived the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord  they 
had  not  been  fasting.  Must  we  then  censure 
the  Universal  Church  because  the  sacrament  is 
everywhere  partaken  of  by  persons  fasting  ? 
Nay,  verily  ;  for  from  that  time  it  pleased  the 
Holy  Spirit  to  appoint,  for  the  honour  of  so 
great  a  sacrament,  that  the  body  of  the  Lord 
should  take  the  precedence  of  all  other  food 
entering  the  mouth  of  a  Christian  ;  and  it  is 
for  this  reason  that  the  custom  referred  to  is 
universally  observed.  For  the  fact  that  the 
Lord  instituted  the  sacrament  after  other  food 
had  been  partaken  of  does  not  prove  that 
brethren  should  come  together  to  partake  of 


that  sacrament  after  having  dined  or  supped, 
or  imitate  those  whom  the  Apostle  reproved 
and  corrected  for  not  distinguishing  between 
the  Lord's  Supper  and  an  ordinary  meal. 
The  Saviour,  indeed,  in  order  to  commend  the 
depths  of  that  mystery  more  affectingly  to 
his  disciples,  was  pleased  to  impress  it  on 
their  hearts  and  memories  by  making  its  in- 
stitution his  last  act  before  going  from  them 
■  to  his  passion.  And,  therefore,  he  did  not 
I  prescribe  the  order  in  which  it  was  to  be  ob- 
served, reserving  this  to  be  done  by  the  Apos- 
tles, through  whom  he  intended  to  arrange 
|  all  things  pertaining  to  the  churches.  Had 
he  appointed  that  the  sacrament  should  be 
always  partaken  of  after  other  food,  I  believe 
that  no  one  would  have  departed  from  that 
practice.  But  when  the  Apostle,  speaking  of 
this  sacrament,  says,  'Wherefore,  my  brethren, 
when  ye  come  together  to  eat,  tarry  one  for 
another,  and  if  any  man  hunger  let  him  eat  at 
home,  that  ye  come  not  together  unto  con- 
demnation,' he  immediately  adds,  'And  the 
rest  will  I  set  in  order  when  I  come.'  Whence 
we  are  given  to  understand  that,  since  it  was 
too  much  for  him  to  prescribe  completely  in 
an  epistle  the  method  observed  by  the  Uni- 
versal Church  throughout  the  world  it  was 
one  of  the  things  set  in  order  by  him  in  per- 
son ;  for  we  find  its  observance  uniform  amid 
all  the  variety  of  other  customs."  l 


'  Aug.  Epist.  ad  Januar. 


156 


SYNOD    OF   LAODICEA.     A.D.  343-381 


In  fact  the  utter  absurdity  of  the  attempt 
to  maintain  the  opposite  cannot  better  be 
seen  than  in  reading  Kingdon's  Fasting  Com- 
munion, an  example  of  special  pleading  and 
disingenuousness  rarely  equalled  even  in  con- 
troversial theological  literature.  A  brief  but 
crushing  refutation  of  the  position  taken  by 
that  writer  will  be  found  in  an  appendix  to  a 
pamphlet  by  H.  P.  Liddon,  Evening  Commu- 
nions contrary  to  the  Teaching  and  Practice  of 
the  Church  in  all  Ages. 

But  while  this  is  true,  it  is  also  true  that  in 
some  few  places  the  custom  had  lingered  on 
of  making  Maundy  Thursday  night  an  excep- 
tion to  this  rule,  and  of  having  then  a  feast, 
in  memory  of  our  Lord's  Last  Supper,  and 
after  this  having  a  celebration  of  the  Divine 
Mysteries.  This  is  the  custom  which  is  pro- 
hibited by  this  canon,  but  it  is  manifest  both 
from   the  wording  of  the  canon   itself  and 


from  the  remarks  of  the  Greek  commentators 
that  the  custom  was  condemned  not  because 
it  necessitated  an  unfasting  reception  of  the 
Holy  Eucharist,  but  because  it  connoted  a 
feast  which  was  a  breaking  of  the  Lenten 
fast  and  a  dishonour  to  the  whole  of  the  holy 
season. 

It  is  somewhat  curious  and  a  trifle  amusing 
to  read  Zonaras  gravely  arguing  the  point  as 
to  whether  the  drinking  of  water  is  forbidden 
by  this  canon  because  it  speaks  of  "dry 
meats,"  which  he  decides  in  the  negative ! 

Balsamon. 

Those,  therefore,  who  without  being  ill,  fast 
on  oil  and  shell-fish,  do  contrary  to  this  law  ; 
and  much  more  they  who  eat  on  the  fourth 
and  sixth  ferias  fish. 


CANON  LI. 

The  nativities  of  Martyrs  are  not  to  be  celebrated  in  Lent,  but  commemorations  of 
the  holy  Martyrs  are  to  be  made  on  the  Sabbaths  and  Lord's  days. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LI. 
Commemorations  of  Martyrs  shall  only  be  held 
on  Lord's  days  and  Sabbaths. 

By  this  canon  all  Saints-days  are  forbidden 
to  be  observed  in  Lent  on  the  days  on  which 
they  fall,  but  must  be  transferred  to  a  Sab- 
bath or  else  to  the  Sunday,  when  they  can  be 
kept  with  the  festival  service  of  the  full 
liturgy  and  not  with  the  penitential  incom- 
pleteness of  the  Mass  of  the  Presanctified. 
Compare  canon  xlix.  of  this  Synod,  and  canon 
lij.  of  the  Quinisext  Council. 


Balsamon. 


The  whole  of  Lent  is  a  time  of  grief  for  our 
sins,  and  the  memories  of  the  Saints  are  not 
kept  except  on  the  Sabbaths. 

Van  Espen  remarks  how  in  old  calendars 
there  are  but  few  Saints-days  in  those 
months  in  which  Lent  ordinarily  falls,  and 
that  the  multitude  of  days  now  kept  by  the 
Roman  ordo  are  mostly  of  modern  introduc- 
tion. 


CANON  LII. 

Marriages  and  birthday  feasts  are  not  to  be  celebrated  in  Lent. 


NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LII.  {  natalitia  martyrum  is  not  to  be  understood  as 

Marriage  shall  not  be  celebrated  in  Lent,  nor 


in  the  preceding  canon,  but  the  birthday 
feasts  of  princes.  This,  as  well  as  the  pre- 
ceding rule,  was  renewed  in  the  sixth  century 
by  Bishop  Martin  of  Bracara,  now  Braga,  in 
By   "birthday  feasts"  in  this   canon  the  Portugal. 


birthdays. 


Hefele. 


CANON  LIII. 

Christians,  when  they  attend  weddings,  must  not  join  in  wanton  dances,  but  mod- 
estly dine  or  breakfast,  as  is  becoming  to  Christians. 


SYNOD   OF   LAODICEA.     A.D.  343-381 


157 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  LIII. 
It  is  unsuitable  to  dance  or  leap  at  weddings. 

Van  Espen. 

This  canon  does  not  call  for  explanation 
but  for  reflexion,  and  greatly  it  is  to  be 
desired  that  it  should  be  observed  by  Chris- 


tians, and  that  through  like  improprieties, 
wedding-days,  which  should  be  days  of  holy 
joy  and  blessing,  be  not  turned,  even  to  the 
bride  and  groom  themselves,  into  days  of 
cursing.  Moreover  the  Synod  of  Trent  ad- 
monishes bishops  (Sess.  xxiv.,  Be  Reform,  Mat, 
cap.  x.)  to  take  care  that  at  weddings  there 
be  only  that  which  is  modest  and  proper. 


CANON  LIV. 

Members  of  the  priesthood  and  of  the  clergy  must  not  witness  the  plays  at  wed- 
dings or  banquets ;  but,  before  the  players  enter,  they  must  rise  and  depart. 


NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LIV. 
Priests  and  clerics  should  leave  before  tlieplay. 


Aristenus. 

Christians  are  admonished  to  feast  mod- 
estly when  they  go  to  weddings  and  not  to 
dance  nor  (3a\\tt,eiv,  that  is  to  clap  their  hands 
and  make  a  noise  with  them.  For  this  is 
unworthy  of   the   Christian  standing.      But 


consecrated  persons  must  not  see  the  play  at 
weddings,  but  before  the  thymelici  begin, 
they  must  go  out. 


Compare  with  this  Canons  XXIV.  and  LI., 
of  the  Synod  in  Trullo. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  III.,  De 
Conseerat  Dist.  v.,  can.  xxxvij. 


CANON  LV. 

Neither  members  of  the  priesthood  nor  of  the  clergy,  nor  yet  laymen,  may  club  to- 
gether for  drinking  entertainments. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LV. 

Neither  a  layman  nor  a  cleric  shall  celebrate  a 
club  feast. 

These  meals,  the  expenses  of  which  were 
defrayed  by  a  number  clubbing  together  and 
sharing  the  cost,  were  called  "  symbola  "  by 
Isidore,  and  by  Melinus  and  Crabbe  "  comis- 


salia,"  although  the  more  ordinary  form  is 
"commensalia"  or  "  comessalia."  Cf.  Du- 
cange  Gloss.,  s.  v.  Commensalia  and  Confer- 
tum. 

This  Canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
XLIV.,  c.  x.  (Isidore's  version),  and  c.  xij., 
(Martin  of  Braga's  version). 


CANON  LVI. 

Presbyters  may  not  enter  and  take  their  seats  in  the  bema  before  the  entrance  of 
the  Bishop :  but  they  must  enter  with  the  Bishop,  unless  he  be  at  home  sick,  or  absent. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LVI. 


A  presbyter  shall  not  enter  the  bema  before 
the  bishop,  nor  sit  doivn. 

It  is  difficult  to  translate  this  canon  with- 
out giving  a  false  idea  of  its  meaning.     It 


does  not  determine  the  order  of  dignity  in  an 
ecclesiastical  procession,  but  something  en- 
tirely different,  viz.,  it  provides  that  when  the 
bishop  enters  the  sanctuary  he  should  not  be 
alone  and  walk  into  a  place  already  occupied, 
but  that  he  should  have  with  him,  as  a  guard 


158 


SYNOD   OF  LAODICEA.     A.D.  343-381 


of  honour,  the  clergy.  Whether  these  should 
•walk  before  or  after  him  would  be  a  mere 
matter  of  local  custom,  the  rule  juniores 
priores  did  not  universally  prevail. 


This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
XCV.,  can.  viij. 


CANON  LVII. 

Bishops  must  not  be  appointed  in  villages  or  country  districts,  but  visitors;  and 
those  who  have  been  already  appointed  must  do  nothing  without  the  consent  of  the 
bishop  of  the  city.  Presbyters,  in  like  manner,  must  do  nothing  without  the  consent  of 
the  bishop. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LVII. 
A  bishop  shall  not  be  established  in  a  village 
or    in    the    country,  but   a  periodeutes.     But 
should  one  be  appointed  he  shall  not  perform 
any  function  ivithout  the  bishop  of  the  city. 

On  the  whole  subject  of  Chorepiscopi  see 
the  Excursus  to  Canon  VIII.  of  Nice,  in  this 
volume. 

Hefele. 

Compare  the  eighth  and  tenth  canons  of  the 
Synod  of  Antioch  of  341,  the  thirteenth  of  the 
Synod  of  Ancyra,  and  the  second  clause  of 
the  sixth  canon  of  the  Synod  of  Sardica.  The 
above  canon  orders  that  from  henceforth,  in 


the  place  of  the  rural  bishops,  priests  of 
higher  rank  shall  act  as  visitors  of  the  country 
dioceses  and  country  clergy.  Dionysius  Exi- 
guus,  Isidore,  the  Greek  commentators,  Van 
Espen,  Remi  Ceillier,  Neander,  and  others 
thus  interpret  this  canon  ;  but  Herbst,  in  the 
Tubingen  Review,  translates  the  word  {irtpio- 
Seurai)  not  visitors  but  physicians — physicians 
of  the  soul, — and  for  this  he  appeals  to  pas- 
sages from  the  Fathers  of  the  Church  collected 
by  Suicer  in  his  Thesaurus. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
LXXX.,  c.  v. 


CANON  LVIII. 

The  Oblation  must  not  be  made  by  bishops  or  presbyters  in  any  private  houses. 


NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LVIII.  |to    the    mind 

Neither  a  bishop  nor  a  presbyter  shall  make  the  \  Zonaras  says  : 
offering  in  private  houses. 

Van  Espen. 


of     the    Greek    interpreters. 

'  The  faithful  can  pray  to  God 
and  be  intent  upon  their  prayers  everywhere, 
whether  in  the  house,  in  the  field,  or  in  any 
place   they  possess  :  but  to  offer  or  perform 


By  "  the  oblation  "  here    is   intended    the  '  the  oblation  must  by  no  means  be  done  ex- 
oblation  of  the  unbloody  sacrifice  according  j  cept  in  a  church  and  at  an  altar." 


CANON  LIX. 

No  psalms  composed  by  private  individuals  nor  any  uncanonical  books  may  be  read 
in  the  church,  but  only  the  Canonical  Books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LIX. 
Psalms  of  private  origin,  or  books  uncanoni- 
cal are  not  to  be  sang  in  temples ;  but  the  ca- 
nonical ivritings  of  the  old  and  new  testaments. 

Hefele. 
Several  heretics,  for  instance  Bavdesanes, 
Paul    of    Samosata,   and    Apollinaris  —  had 


composed  psalms,  i.e.,  Church  hymns.  The 
Synod  of  Laodicea  forbade  the  use  of  any 
composed  by  private  individuals,  namely  all 
unauthorized  Church  hymns.  Liift  remarks 
that  by  this  it  wras  not  intended  to  forbid  the 
use  of  all  but  the  Bible  psalms  and  hymns, 
for  it  is  known  that  even  after  this  Synod 
many  hymns  composed  by  individual  Chris- 


SYNOD  OF  LAODICEA.    A.D.  343-381 


159 


tians,  for  instance,  Prudentius,  Clement,  and 
Ambrose,  came  into  use  in  the  Church.  Only 
those  not  sanctioned  were  to  be  banished. 

This  idea  was  greatly  exaggerated  by  some 
Gallicans  in  the  seventeenth  century  who 
wished  that  all  the  Antiphons,  etc.,  should  be 


in  the  words  of  Holy  Scripture.  A  learned 
but  somewhat  distorted  account  of  this  whole 
matter  will  be  found  in  the  Institutions 
Liturgiqites  by  Dom  Prosper  Gueranger, 
tome  ij.,  and  a  shorter  but  more  temperate 
account  in  Dr.  Batiffol's  Histoire  du  Breviaire 
Bomain,  Chap,  vj, 


CANON  LX. 

[N.  B. — This  Canon  is  of  most  questionable  genuineness.'] 

These  are  all  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  appointed  to  be  read  :  1,  Genesis  of 
the  world ;  2,  The  Exodus  from  Egypt ;  3,  Leviticus ;  4,  Numbers ;  5,  Deuteronomy ; 
6,  Joshua,  the  son  of  Nun ;  7,  Judges,  Ruth  ;  8,  Esther ;  9,  Of  the  Kings,  First  and 
Second ;  10,  Of  the  Kings,  Third  and  Fourth  ;  11,  Chronicles,  First  and  Second ;  12, 
Esdras,  First  and  Second ;  13,  The  Book  of  Psalms ;  14,  The  Proverbs  of  Solomon  ;  15, 
Ecclesiastes  ;  16,  The  Song  of  Songs  ;  17,  Job  ;  18,  The  Twelve  Prophets  ;  19,  Isaiah  ; 
20,  Jeremiah,  and  Baruch,  the  Lamentations,  and  the  Epistle  ;  21,  Ezekiel ;  22,  Daniel. 

And  these  are  the  books  of  the  New  Testament :  Four  Gospels,  according  to  Mat- 
thew, Mark,  Luke  and  John  ;  The  Acts  of  the  Apostles ;  Seven  Catholic  Epistles,  to  wit, 
one  of  James,  two  of  Peter,  three  of  John,  one  of  Jude  ;  Fourteen  Epistles  of  Paul,  one 
to  the  Romans,  two  to  the  Corinthians,  one  to  the  Galatians,  one  to  the  Ephesians,  one 
to  the  Philippians,  one  to  the  Colossians,  two  to  the  Thessalonians,  one  to  the  Hebrews, 
two  to  Timothy,  one  to  Titus,  and  one  to  Philemon. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LX. 


Bat  of  the  new,  the  four  Gospels — of  Matthew, 
of  Mark,  of  Luke,  of  John  ;  Acts ;  Seven  Catho- 
lic epistles,  viz.  of  James  one,  of  Peter  two,  of 
John  three,  of  Jade  one ;  of  Paul  fourteen,  viz.  : 
to  the  Romans  one,  to  the  Corinthians  two,  to 
the  Galatians  one,  to  the  Ephesians  one,  to  the 
Philippians  one,  to  the  Colossians  one,  to  the 
Thessalonians  two,  to  the  Uebreivs  one,  to  Timo- 
thy two,  to  Titus  one,  and  to  Philemon  one. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  while  this  canon  has 
often  been  used  for  controversial  purposes  it 
really  has  little  or  no  value  in  this  connexion, 
for  the  absence  of  the  Revelation  of  St.  John 
from  the  New  Testament  to  all  orthodox 
Christians  is,  to  say  the  least,  as  fatal  to  its 
reception  as  an  ecumenical  definition  of  the 
canon  of  Holy  Scripture,  as  the  absence  of  the 
book  of  Wisdom,  etc.,  from  the  Old  Testa- 
ment is  to  its  reception  by  those  who  accept 
the  books  of  what  we  may  call  for  conven- 
ience the  Greek  canon,  as  distinguished 
from  the  Hebrew,  as  canonical. 

We    may    therefore    leave    this    question 


wholly  out  of  account,  and  merely  consider 
the  matter  from  the  evidence  we  possess. 

In  1777  Spittler  published  a  special  trea- 
tise J  to  shew  that  the  list  of  scriptural  books 
was  no  part  of  the  original  canon  adopted 
by  Laodicea.  Hefele  gives  the  following  re- 
sume of  his  argument : 2 

(a)  That  Dionysius  Exiguus  has  not  this 
canon  in  his  translation  of  the  Laodicean  de- 
crees. It  might,  indeed,  be  said  with  Dal- 
leeus  and  Van  Espen,  that  Dionysius  omitted 
this  list  of  the  books  of  Scripture  because  in 
Rome,  where  he  composed  his  work,  another 
by  Innocent  I.  was  in  general  use. 

(b)  But,  apart  from  the  fact  that  Dionysius 
is  always  a  most  faithful  translator,  this  six- 
tieth canon  is  also  omitted  by  John  of  Anti- 
och,  one  of  the  most  esteemed  and  oldest 
Greek  collectors  of  canons,  who  could  have 
had  no  such  reasons  as  Dionysius  for  his 
omission. 

(c)  Lastly,  Bishop  Martin  of  Braga  in  the 
sixth  century,  though  he  has  the  fifty-ninth, 
has  also  not  included  in  his  collection  the  six- 
tieth canon  so  nearly  related  to  it,  nor  does 
the  Isidorian  translation  appear  at  first  to  have 


1  See  new  edition  of  his  collected  works,  vol.  viij.,  pp.  66  et  seqq.  2  Hefele.    Hist,  of  the  Concils,  Vol.  II.,  pp,  323,  324. 


160 


SYNOD   OF  LAODICEA.     A.D.  343-381 


had  this  canon.1  Herbst,  in  the  Tubingen  "Re- 
view, also  accedes  to  these  arguments  of  Spitt- 
ler's,  as  did  Fuchs  and  others  before  him. 
Mr.  Ffoulkes  in  his  article  on  the  Council  of 


ness  of  the  list,  but  his  conclusions  can 
hardly  be  accepted  when  the  careful  consid- 
eration and  discussion  of  the  matter  by- 
Bishop  Westcott  is  kept  in  mind.     (History 


Laodicea  in  Smith  and  Cheetham's  Dictionary  '  of  the  Canon  of  the  New  Testament,  Hid.  Pe- 
of  Christian  Antiquities  at  length  attempts  to  riod,  chapter  ii.  [p.  428  of  the  4th  Edition.]) 
refute  all  objections,  and  affirms  the  genuine 


1  Leonis,  Opp.,  Ed.  Ballerini,  torn,  iii.,  p.  441,  n.  xlviij. 


THE  SECOND  ECUMENICAL  COUNCIL. 
THE  FIRST  COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANTINOPLE. 

A.D.  381. 

Emperor.  — Theodosius.1 
Pope.  — Damasus. 


Historical  Introduction. 

TJie  Creed  and  Epiphanius's  two  Creeds 
toith  an  Introductory  Note. 

Historical  Excursus  on  the  introduction  of 
the  words  "and  the  Son." 

Historical  Note  on  the  lost  Tome  of  this 
council. 

Synodal  Letter  to  the  Emperor. 

Introduction  on  the  number  of  the  Canons. 


Elenchus. 

The  Canons  with  the  Ancient  Epitome  and 
Notes. 

Excursus  to  Canon  L,  on  the  condemned 
heresies. 

Excurstis  on  the  Authority  of  the  Second 
Ecumenical  Council. 

Synodical  Letter  of  the  Council  of  Con- 
stantinople, A.D.  382. 


1  Theodosius  was  Emperor  of  the  Bast.    Gratian  was  Emperor  of  the  West,  but  had  no  share  in  calling  this  council. 


VOL,    XIV, 


M 


HISTORICAL   INTRODUCTION. 

In  the  whole  history  of  the  Church  there  is  no  council  which  bristles  with  such  astonish- 
ing facts  as  the  First  Council  of  Constantinople.  It  is  one  of  the  "undisputed  General 
Councils,"  one  of  the  four  which  St.  Gregory  said  he  revered  as  he  did  the  four  holy  Gospels, 
and  he  would  be  rash  indeed  who  denied  its  right  to  the  position  it  has  so  long  occupied  ; 
and  yet 

1.  It  was  not  intended  to  be  an  Ecumenical  Synod  at  all. 

2.  It  was  a  local  gathering  of  only  one  hundred  and  fifty  bishops. 

3.  It  was  not  summoned  by  the  Pope,  nor  was  he  invited  to  it. 

4.  No  diocese  of  the  West  was  present  either  by  representation  or  in  the  person  of  its 
bishop  ;  neither  the  see  of  Rome,  nor  any  other  see. 

5.  It  was  a  council  of  Saints,  Cardinal  Orsi,  the  Roman  Historian,  says :  "  Besides  St. 
Gregory  of  Nyssa,  and  St.  Peter  of  Sebaste,  there  were  also  at  Constantinople  on  account 
of  the  Synod  many  other  Bishops,  remarkable  either  for  the  holiness  of  their  life,  or  for 
their  zeal  for  the  faith,  or  for  their  learning,  or  for  the  eminence  of  their  Sees,  as  St.  Amphi- 
lochius  of  Iconium,  Helladius  of  Cesarea  in  Cappadocia,  Optimus  of  Antioch  in  Pisidia, 
Diodorus  of  Tarsus,  St.  Pelagius  of  Laodicea,  St.  Eulogius  of  Edessa,  Acacius  of  Berea, 
Isidorus  of  Cyrus,  St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  Gelasius  of  Cesarea  in  Palestine,  Vitus  of  Carres, 
Dionysius  of  Diospolis,  Abram  of  Batnes,  and  Antiochus  of  Samosata,  all  three  Confessors, 
Bosphorus  of  Colonia,  and  Otreius  of  Melitina,  and  various  others  whose  names  appear  with 
honour  in  history.  So  that  perhaps  there  has  not  been  a  council,  in  which  has  been  found 
a  greater  number  of  Confessors  and  of  Saints."  J 

6.  It  was  presided  over  at  first  by  St.  Meletius,  the  bishop  of  Antioch  who  was  the 
bishop  not  in  communion  with  Rome,2  who  died  during  its  session  and  was  styled  a  Saint 
in  the  panegyric  delivered  over  him  and  who  has  since  been  canonized  as  a  Saint  of  the  Roman 
Church  by  the  Pope. 

7.  Its  second  president  was  St.  Gregory  Nazianzen,  who  was  at  that  time  liable  to  cen- 
sure for  a  breach  of  the  canons  which  forbade  his  translation  to  Constantinople. 

8.  Its  action  in  continuing  the  Meletian  Schism  was  condemned  at  Rome,  and  its  Canons 
rejected  for  a  thousand  years. 

9.  Its  canons  were  not  placed  in  their  natural  position  after  those  of  Nice  in  the  codex 
which  was  used  at  the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  although  this  was  an  Eastern  codex. 

10.  Its  Creed  was  not  read  nor  mentioned,  so  far  as  the  acts  record,  at  the  Council  of 
Ephesus,  fifty  years  afterwards. 

11.  Its  title  to  being  (as  it  undoubtedly  is)  the  Second  of  the  Ecumenical  Synods  rests 
upon  its  Creed  having  found  a  reception  in  the  whole  world.  And  now — mirabUe  dictu — 
an  English  scholar  comes  forward,  read}'  to  defend  the  proposition  that  the  First  Council 
of  Constantinople  never  set  forth  any  creed  at  all ! 3 

»  Orsi,  1st.  Eccl,  xviii.,  63.  his    "exaggeration  of  judgment."    (Salmon.   Criticism  of  the 

2E.  B.  Pusey.  The  Councils  of  the  Church,  A.D.  51-381,  p.  ;  Text  of  the  New  Testament,  p.  12,  also  see  p.  34.)  Swainson,  in 
306.  Tillemont,  Mimoires,  xvj.,  662,  who  says,  '•  If  none  of  those  his  The  A'icene  and  Apostles'  Creeds,  has  all  the  material  points 
who  die  out  of  communion  with  Rome  can  merit  the  title  of  j  found  in  Hort's  Dissertation.  Harnack  goes  much  further.  He 
Saints  and  Confessors,  Baronius  should  have  the  names  of  St.  is  of  opinion  that  the  Creed  of  Constantinople  (as  we  call  it), 
Meletius,  St.  Elias  of  Jerusalem  and  St.  Daniel  the  Stylite  the  Creed  which  has  been  the  symbol  of  orthodoxy  for  fifteen 
stricken  from  the  Martyrology."  Cf.  F.  W.  Puller,  The  Primi-  .  hundred  years,  is  really  a  Semi-Arian,  auti-Nicene,  and  quasi 
tive  Saints  and  the  See  of  Rome,  pp.  174  and  23S.  Macedonian   confession  !    The  first  contention  he  supports,  not 

Many  attempts  have  been  made  to  explain  this  fact  away,  but  without  a  shew  of  plausibility,  by  the  fact  that  it  omits  the  words 
without  success.  Not  only  was  the  president  of  the  Council  a  '  (which  were  really  most  crucial)  "that  istosav  of  the  substance 
persona  non  grata  to  the  Pope,  but  the  members  of  the  Council  ;  of  the  Father."  In  support  of  the  second  opinion  he  writes  as 
were  well  aware  of  the  fact,  and  much  pleased  that  such  was  the  follows:  "The  words  [with  regard  to  the  Holy  Ghost]  are  in 
case,  and  Hefele  acknowledges  that  the  reason  the  council  deter-  entire  harmony  with  the  form  which  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy 
mined  to  continue  the  Meletian  Schism  was  because  allowing  j  Spirit  had  in  the  sixties.  A  Pneumatochian  could  have  subscribed 
Panlinus  to  succeed  to  Meletius  would  be  "too  great  a  conces-  this  formula  at  a  pinch;  and  just  because  of  this  it  is  certain 
sion  to  the  Latins  "  (vol.  in.,  p.  346).  \  that  the  Council  of  381  did  not  accept  this  creed."    Some  scholars 

3F.  J.  A.  Hort,  Tuo  Dissertations.  I.  On  (xovoye'ir;?  ©e'o;  in  arrive  at  "certainty"  more  easilv  than  others,  even  Harnack 
Scripture  and  tradition,  IT.  On  the  Constantinopolitan  Creed  himself  only  attains  this  "certainty"  in  the  foot-note!  The 
and  other  Eastern  Creeds  of  tlte  ith  Century.  It  should  be  added  '  reader  will  remark  that  what  Harnack  is  "  certain  "  of  in  the 
that  Dr.  Hort  acknowledges  that,  "  we  may  well  believe  that  they  ;  foot-note  is  that  the  Council  "did  not  accept"  this  creed,  not 
[i.e.  the  150  fathers  of  Constantinople]  had  expressed  approval"  '  that  it  "did  not  frame  "  it.  which  is  entirely  a  different  ques- 
of  the  creed  ordinarily  attributed  to  them  (p.  115).  The  whole  j  tion.  (Adolf  Harnack,  History  of  Dogma,  [Eug.  Trans.],  Vol. 
dissertation  is  a  fine  example  of  what  Dr.  Salmon  so  well  called  [  iv.,  p.  99.) 
Dr.  Hort's  "  perfervidum  ingenium  as  an    advocate,"  and  of 


THE  HOLY  CREED  WHICH  THE  150  HOLY  FATHERS  SET 
FORTH,  WHICH  IS  CONSONANT  WITH  THE  HOLY  AND 
GREAT  SYNOD  OF  NICE.1 

{Found  in  all  the  Collections  in  the  Acts  of  the  Council  of  Chcdcedon.) 

INTRODUCTORY  NOTE. 

The  reader  should  know  that  Tillemont  (Memoires,  t.  ix.,  art.  78  in  the  treatise  on  St.  Greg. 
Naz.)  broached  the  theory  that  the  Creed  adopted  at  Constantinople  was  not  a  new  expan- 
sion of  the  Nicene  but  rather  the  adoj)tion  of  a  Creed  already  in  use.  Hefele  is  of  the  same 
opinion  (Hist,  of  the  Councils,  II.,  p.  349),  and  the  learned  Professor  of  Divinity  in  the  Uni- 
versity of  Jena,  Dr.  Lipsius,  says,  of  St.  Epiphanius  :  "Though  not  himself  present  at  the 
Ecumenical  Council  of  Constantinople,  a.d.  381,  which  ensured  the  triumph  of  the  Nicene 
doctrine  in  the  Oriental  Churches,  his  shorter  confession  of  faith,  which  is  found  at  the  end 
of  his  Ancoratus,  and  seems  to  have  been  the  baptismal  creed  of  the  Church  of  Salamis, 
agrees  almost  word  for  word  with  the  Constantinopolitan  formula."  (Smith  and  Wace,  Diet. 
Chr.  Biog.,  s.  v.  Epiphanius).  "  The  Ancoratus,"  St.  Epiphanius  distinctly  tells  us,  was  written 
as  early  as  a.d.  374,  and  toward  the  end  of  chapter  cxix.,  he  writes  as  follows.  "  The  children 
of  the  Church  have  received  from  the  holy  fathers,  that  is  from  the  holy  Apostles,  the  faith 
to  keep,  and  to  hand  down,  and  to  teach  their  children.  To  these  children  you  belong,  and 
I  beg  you  to  receive  it  and  pass  it  on.  And  whilst  you  teach  your  children  these  things  and 
such  as  these  from  the  holy  Scriptures,  cease  not  to  confirm  and  strengthen  them,  and  indeed 
all  who  hear  j'ou  :  tell  them  that  this  is  the  holy  faith  of  the  Holy  Catholic  Church,  as  the 
one  holy  Virgin  of  God  received  it  from  the  holy  Apostles  of  the  Lord  to  keep :  and  thus 
every  person  who  is  in  preparation  for  the  holy  laver  of  baptism  must  learn  it :  they  must 
learn  it  themselves,  and  teach  it  expressly,  as  the  one  Mother  of  all,  of  you  and  of  us,  pro- 
claims it,  saying."     Then  follows  the  Creed  as  on  page  164. 


We  believe  in  one  God,  the  Father  Al- 
mighty, maker  of  heaven  and  earth  and  of 
all  things  visible  and  invisible.  And  in  one 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  only  begotten  Son 
of  God,  begotten  of  his  Father  before  all 
worlds,  Light  of  Light,  very  God  of  very 
God,  begotten  not  made,  being  of  one  sub- 
stance with  the  Father,  by  whom  all  things 
were  made.  Who  for  us  men  and  for  our 
salvation  came  down  from  heaven  and  was 
incarnate  by  the  Holy  Ghost  and  the  Virgin 
Mary,  and  Avas  made  man,  and  was  crucified 
also  for  us  under  Pontius  Pilate.  He  suf- 
fered and  was  buried,  and  the  third  day  lie 
rose  again  according  to  the  Scriptures,  and 
ascended  into  heaven,  and  sitteth  at  the 
Rkht  Hand  of  the  Father.  And  he  shall 
come  again  with  glory  to  judge  both  the 
quick  and  the  dead.  Whose  kingdom  shall 
have  no  end.    (I) 


And  [we  believe]  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  the 
Lord  and  Giver-of-Life,  who  proceedeth 
from  the  Father,  who  with  the  Father  and  the 
Son  together  is  worshipped  and  glorified, 
who  spake  by  the  prophets.  And  [we  be- 
lieve] in  one,  holy,  (II)  Catholic  and  Apos- 
tolic Church.  We  acknowledge  one  Baptism 
for  the  remission  of  sins,  [and]  we  look  for 
the  resurrection  of  the  dead  and  the  life  of 
the  world  to  come.     Amen. 

NOTE   I. 

This  clause  had  already,  so  far  as  the  mean- 
ing is  concerned,  been  added  to  the  Nicene 
Creed,  j^ears  before,  in  correction  of  the  heresy 
of  Marcellus  of  Ancyra,  of  whose  heresy  a 
statement  will  be  found  in  the  notes  on  Canon 
I.  of  this  Council.  One  of  the  creeds  of  the 
Council  of  Antioch  in  Encpeniis  (a.d.  341) 
reads :  "  and  he  sitteth  at  the  right  hand  of 


This  is  the  title  in  the  Acts  of  the  IVth  Council.    Labbe,  Cone.,  iv.,  343. 
M  3 


164 


I.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  381 


the  Father,  and  he  shall  come  again  to  judge 
both  the  quick  and  the  dead,  and  he  remaineth 
God  and  King  to  all  eternity."1 

NOTE  II. 

The  word  "  Holy  "  is  omitted  in  some  texts 
of  this  Creed,  notably  in  the  Latin  version  in 
the  collection  of  Isidore  Mercator.  Vide 
Labbe,  Cone,  II.,  960.  Cf.  Creed  in  English 
Prayer-Book. 

NOTES. 

The  Creed  Found  in  Epiphanius's  Ancoratus 
(Cap.  cxx.)3 

We  believe  in  one  God  the  Father  Almighty, 
maker  of  heaven  and  earth,  and  of  all  things 
visible  and  invisible :  and  in  one  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  the  only  begotten  Son  of  God,  begot- 
ten of  the  Father  before  all  worlds,  that  is  of 
the  substance  of  the  Father,  Light  of  Light, 
very  God  of  very  God,  begotten  not  made, 
consubstantial  with  the  Father  :  by  whom  all 
things  were  made,  both  in  heaven  and  earth  : 
who  for  us  men  and  for  our  salvation  came 
down  from  heaven,  and  was  incarnate  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  and  the  Virgin  Mary,  and  was 
made  man,  was  crucified  also  for  us  under 
Pontius  Pilate,  and  suffered,  and  was  buried, 
and  on  the  third  day  he  rose  again  according 
to  the  Scriptures,  and  ascended  into  heaven, 
and  sitteth  on  the  right  hand  of  the  Father, 
and  from  thence  he  shall  come  again  with 
glory  to  judge  both  the  quick  and  the  dead, 
whose  kingdom  shall  have  no  end.  And  in 
the  Holy  Ghost,  the  Lord  and  Giver  of  life, 
who  proceedeth  from  the  Father  ;  who,  with 
the  Father  and  the  Son  together  is  worshipped 
and  glorified,  who  spake  by  the  prophets  :  in 
one  holy  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church.  "We 
acknowledge  one  baptism  for  the  remission  of 
sins  ;  we  look  for  the  resurrection  of  the  dead, 
and  the  life  of  the  world  to  come.  And  those 
who  say  that  there  was  a  time  when  the  Son 
of  God  was  not,  and  before  he  was  begotten 
he  was  not,  or  that  he  was  of  things  which  are 
not,  or  that  he  is  of  a  different  hypostasis  or 
substance,  or  pretend  that  he  is  effluent  or 
changeable,  these  the  Catholic  and  Apostolic 
Church  anathematizes. 

Epiphanius  thus  continues  : 
"  And    this    faith  was  delivered  from  the 
Holy  Aj)Ostles  and  in  the  Church,  the  Holy 

i  Soc,  U.  E.,  II.,  10  ;  Soz.,  //.  E.,  III.  5  ;  Athanas.,  De  Synod., 
C.  xxij. 

2 1  have  used  Petavius's  edition,  Cologne.  1C82  ;  there  are  some 
differences  in  the  various  editions  about  the  numbering  of  the 
chapters,  and  this  seems  to  be  the  origin  of  the  curious  mistake 
Hefele  makes  in  confounding  the  longer  with  the  shorter  creed. 


City,  from  all  the  Holy  Bishops  together 
more  than  three  hundred  and  ten  in  number. " 

"  In  our  generation,  that  is  in  the  times  of 
Valentinus  and  Valens,  and  the  ninetieth  year 
from  the  succession  of  Diocletian  the  tyrant, :i 
you  and  we  and  all  the  orthodox  bishops  of 
the  whole  Catholic  Church  together,  make 
this  address  to  those  who  come  to  baptism, 
in  order  that  they  may  proclaim  and  say  as 
follows : " 

Epiphanius  then  gives  this  creed  : 

We  believe  in  one  God,  the  Father 
Almighty,  maker  of  all  things,  invisible  and 
visible.  And  in  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ  the 
Son  of  God,  begotten  of  God  the  Father,  only 
begotten,  that  is  of  the  substance  of  the 
Father,  God  of  God,  Light  of  Light,  very  God 

'  of  very  God,  begotten  not  made,  being  of  one 
substance  with  the  Father,  by  whom  all 
things  were  made,  both  which  be  in  heaven 
and  in  earth,  whether  they  be  visible  or  in- 
visible. Who  for  us  men  and  for  our  salva- 
tion came  down,  and  was  incarnate,  that  is  to 
say  was  conceived  perfectly  through  the  Holy 
Ghost  of  the  holy  ever- virgin  Mary,  and  was 
made  man,  that  is  to  say  a  perfect  man,  re- 
ceiving a  soul,  and  body,  and  intellect,  and  all 
that  make  up  a  man,  but  without  sin,  not  from 
human  seed,  nor  [that  he  dwelt]  in  a  man,  but 
taking  flesh  to  himself  into  one  holy  entity  ; 
not  as  he  inspired  the  prophets  and  spake  and 
worked  [in  them],  but  was  perfectly  made 
man,  for  the  Word  was  made  flesh  ;  neither 
did  he  experience  any  change,  nor  did  he 
convert  his  divine  nature  into  the  nature  of 
man,  but  united  it  to  his  one  holy  perfection 
and  Divinity. 

For  there  is  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  not  two, 
the  same  is  God,  the  same  is  Lord,  the  same 
is  King.     He  suffered  in  the  flesh,  and  rose 

|  again,  and  ascended  into  heaven  in  the  same 
body,  and  with  glory  he  sat  down  at  the 
right  hand  of  the  Father,  and  in  the  same  body 

1  he  will  come  in  glory  to  judge  both  the  quick 
and  the  dead,  and  of  his  kingdom  there  shall 
be  no  end. 

Aud  we  believe  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  who 
spake  in  the  Law,  and  preached  in  the  Proph- 
ets, and  descended  at  Jordan,  and  spake  in 
the  Apostles,  and  indwells  the  Saints.  And 
thus  we  believe  in  him,  that  he  is  the  Holy 
Spirit,  the  Spirit  of  God,  the  perfect  Spirit, 
the  Spirit  the  Comforter,  uncreate,  who  pro- 
ceedeth from  the  Father,  receiving  of  the  Son 
(sk  rov  Tlarpos  iK~opev6/xevov,  kcu  e«  tov  Ylov  Aa/i- 
Pavo/jLtrov),  and  believed  on.     (kcu  mo-revofievoi', 

3  This  would  be  the  year  374,  that  is  to  say  seven  years  before 
this  Second  Ecumenical  Council  which  was  held  a't  Constanti- 
nople in  381. 


I.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  381  1G5 


which  the  Latin  version  gives  in  quern  credi- 
mus ;  and  proceeds  to  insert,  Prceterea  credi- 
mus  in  unam,  etc.  It  certainly  looks  as  if  it 
had  read  TnoTzvojj.iv,  and  had  belonged  to  the 
following  phrase.) 

[We  believe]  in  one  Catholic  and  Apostolic 
Church.     And  in  one  baptism  of  penitence, 


Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church,  the  mother 
both  of  you  and  of  its,  anathematizes.  And 
further  we  anathematize  such  as  do  not  con- 
fess the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  as  well  as  all 
heresies  which  are  not  in  accord  with  the  true 
faith. 

Finally,  you  and  your  children  thus  believ- 


and  in  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  and  the  ■  ing  and  keeping  the  commandments  of  this 
just  judgment  of  souls  and  bodies,  and  in  the  i  same  faith,  we  trust  that  you  will  always  pray 
Kingdom  of  heaven  and  in  life  everlasting.  for  us,  that  we  may  have  a  share  and  lot  in 
And  those  who  say  that  there  was  a  time  j  that  same  faith  and  in  the  keeping  of  these 
when  the  Son  Avas  not,  or  when  the  Holy  :  same  commandments.  For  us  make  your 
Ghost  was  not,  or  that  either  was  made  of  that  j  intercessions  you  and  all  who  believe  thus, 
which  previously  had  no  being,  or  that  he  is  and  keep  the  commandments  of  the  Lord  in 
of  a  different  nature  or  substance,  and  affirm  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  through  whom  and 
that  the  Son  of  God  and  the  Holy  Spirit  are  :  with  whom,  glory  be  to  the  Father  with  the 
subject  to  change  and  mutation  ;  all  such  the  I  Holy  Spirit  for  ever  and  ever.     Amen. 


HISTORICAL    EXCURSUS    ON    THE    INTRODUCTION    INTO    THE    CREED    OF 

THE   WORDS   "AND   THE  SON." 

The  introduction  into  the  Nicene  Creed  of  the  words  "  and  the  Son  "  {Filioque)  has  given 
rise  to,  or  has  been  the  pretext  for,  such  bitter  reviling  between  East  and  West  (during 
which  many  statements  unsupported  by  fact  have  become  more  or  less  commonly  believed) 
that  I  think  it  well  in  this  place  to  set  forth  as  dispassionately  as  possible  the  real  facts  of 
the  case.     I  shall  briefly  then  give  the  proof  of  the  following  propositions  : 

1.  That  no  pretence  is  made  by  the  West  that  the  words  in  dispute  formed  part  of  the 
original  creed  as  adopted  at  Constantinople,  or  that  they  now  form  part  of  that  Creed. 

2.  That  so  far  from  the  insertion  being  made  by  the  Pope,  it  was  made  in  direct  opposi- 
tion to  his  wishes  and  command. 

3.  That  it  never  Avas  intended  by  the  words  to  assert  that  there  were  two  'Apxal  in  the 
Trinity,  nor  in  any  respect  on  this  point  to  differ  from  the  teaching  of  the  East. 

4.  That  it  is  quite  possible  that  the  words  were  not  an  intentional  insertion  at  all. 

5.  And  finally  that  the  doctrine  of  the  East  as  set  forth  by  St.  John  Damascene  is  now 
and  always  has  been  the  doctrine  of  the  West  on  the  procession  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  however 
much  through  ecclesiastico-political  contingencies  this  fact  may  have  become  obscured. 

With  the  truth  or  falsity  of  the  doctrine  set  forth  by  the  Western  addition  to  the  creed 
this  work  has  no  concern,  nor  even  am  I  called  upon  to  treat  the  historical  question  as  to 
when  and  where  the  expression  "  and  the  Son  "  Avas  first  used.  For  a  temperate  and  emi- 
nently scholarly  treatment  of  this  point  from  a  Western  point  of  view,  I  would  refer  the 
reader  to  Professor  Swete's  On  the  History  of  the  Doctrine  of  the  Procession  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
In  J.  M.  Neale's  History  of  the  Holy  Eastern  Church  Avill  be  found  a  statement  from  the  oppo- 
site point  of  view.  The  great  treatises  of  past  years  I  need  not  mention  here,  but  may  be 
allowed  to  enter  a  warning  to  the  reader,  that  they  Avere  often  written  in  the  period  of  hot 
controversy,  and  make  more  for  strife  than  for  peace,  magnifying  rather  than  lessening  dif- 
ferences both  of  thought  and  expression. 

Perhaps,  too,  I  may  be  allowed  here  to  remind  the  readers  that  it  has  been  said  that 
AA-hile  "  ex  Patre  Filioque  procedens  "  in  Latin  does  not  necessitate  a  double  source  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  the  expression  tKiroptvoiLzvov  in  tov  Trarpos  jcai  e«  rov  Ylov  does.  On  such  a  point  I 
am  not  fit  to  give  an  opinion,  but  St.  John  Damascene  does  not  use  this  expression. 

1.  That  no  pretence  is  made  by  the  West  that  the  words  in  dispute  ever  formed  part  of 


166 


I.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  381 


the  creed  as  adopted  at  Constantinople  is  evidently  proved  by  the  patent  fact  that  it  is 
printed  without  those  words  in  all  our  Concilias  and  in  all  our  histories.  It  is  true  that  at 
the  Council  of  Florence  it  was  asserted  that  the  words  were  found  in  a  copy  of  the  Acts  of 
the  Seventh  Ecumenical  which  they  had,  but  no  stress  was  even  at  that  eminently  Western 
council  laid  upon  the  point,  which  even  if  it  had  been  the  case  would  have  shewn  nothing 
with  regard  to  the  true  reading  of  the  Creed  as  adopted  by  the  Second  Synod.1  On  this 
point  there  never  was  nor  can  be  any  doubt. 

2.  The  addition  was  not  made  at  the  will  and  at  the  bidding  of  the  Pope.  It  has  fre- 
quently been  said  that  it  was  a  proof  of  the  insufferable  arrogancy  of  the  See  of  Rome  that 
it  dared  to  tamper  with  the  creed  set  forth  by  the  authority  of  an  Ecumenical  Synod  and 
which  had  been  received  by  the  world.  Now  so  far  from  the  history  of  this  addition  to  the 
creed  being  a  ground  of  pride  and  complacency  to  the  advocates  of  the  Papal  claims,  it  is  a 
most  marked  instance  of  the  weakness  of  the  papal  power  even  in  the  West. 

"  Baronius,"  says  Dr.  Pusey,  "  endeavours  in  vain  to  find  any  Pope,  to  whom  the  '  formal 
addition '  may  be  ascribed,  and  rests  at  last  on  a  statement  of  a  writer  towards  the  end  of 
the  12th  century,  writing  against  the  Greeks.  '  If  the  Council  of  Constantinople  added  to 
the  Nicene  Creed,  "  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  Lord,  and  Giver  of  life,"  and  the  Council  of 
Chalcedon  to  that  of  Constantinople,  "  perfect  in  Divinity  and  perfect  in  Humanity,  consub- 
stantial  with  the  Father  as  touching  his  Godhead,  consubstantial  with  us  as  touching  his 
manhood,"  and  some  other  things  as  aforesaid,  the  Bishop  of  the  elder  Kome  ought  not  to 
be  calumniated,  because  for  explanation,  he  added  one  word  [that  the  Holy  Spirit  proceeds 
from  the  Son]  having  the  consent  of  very  many  bishops  and  most  learned  Cardinals.'  '  For 
the  truth  of  which,'  says  Le  Quien,  'be  the  author  responsible  ! '  It  seems  to  me  incon- 
ceivable, that  all  account  of  any  such  proceeding,  if  it  ever  took  place,  should  have  been 
lost."2 

We  may  then  dismiss  this  point  and  briefly  review  the  history  of  the  matter. 

There  seems  little  doubt  that  the  words  were  first  inserted  in  Spain.  As  early  as  the 
year  400  it  had  been  found  necessary  at  a  Council  of  Toledo  to  affirm  the  double  procession 
against  the  Priscillianists,3  and  in  589  by  the  authority  of  the  Third  Council  of  Toledo  the 
newly  converted  Goths  were  required  to  sign  the  creed  with  the  addition.1  From  this  time 
it  became  for  Spain  the  accepted  form,  and  was  so  recited  at  the  Eighth  Council  of  Toledo 
in  653,  and  again  in  681  at  the  Twelfth  Council  of  Toledo.5 

But  this  was  at  first  only  true  of  Spain,  and  at  Rome  nothing  of  the  kind  was  known.  In 
the  Gelasian  Sacramentary  the  Creed  is  found  in  its  original  form.6  The  same  is  the  case 
with  the  old  Gallican  Sacramentary  of  the  viith  or  viiith  century.7 

However,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  its  introduction  spread  very  rapidly  through  the 
West  and  that  before  long  it  was  received  practically  everywhere  except  at  Rome. 

In  809  a  council  was  held  at  Aix-la-Chapelle  by  Charlemagne,  and  from  it  three  divines 
were  sent  to  confer  with  the  Pope,  Leo  III,  upon  the  subject.  The  Pope  opposed  the  inser- 
tion of  the  Filioque  on  the  express  ground  that  the  General  Councils  had  forbidden  any 
addition  to  be  made  to  their  formulary.8  Later  on,  the  Frankish  Emperor  asked  his  bishops 
what  was  "the  meaning  of  the  Creed  according  to  the  Latins,"9  and  Fleury  gives  the  result 
of  the  investigations  to  have  been,  "In  France  they  continued  to  chant  the  creed  with  the 
word  Filioque,  and  at  Rome  they  continued  not  to  chant  it."10 


1  In  fact  the  contention  of  the  Latins  was  that  the  words  were 
inserted  by  II.  Nice !  To  this  the  Easterns  answered  most  perti- 
nently "  Why  did  you  not  tell  us  this  long  ago  ?  "  They  were  not 
so  fortunate  when  they  insisted  that  St.  Thomas  would  have 
quoted  it.  for  some  scholars  have  thought  St.  Thomas  but  ill  ac- 
quainted with  the  proceedings  at  the  Seventh  Synod.  Vide  Ile- 
fele,  Concil.  XLVIII.,  §  610. 

aE.  B.  Pusey.    On  the  clause  "  and  The  Son,"  p.  6S. 


3HefeIe.    Hist,  of  tlw  Councils.  Vol.  III.,  p.  1T5. 

*  Ilefele.     Hist.  Counc,  Vol.  IV..  p.  41H. 

6  Hefele.    Hist.  Counc,  Vol.  IV.,  p.  470  ;  Vol.  V.,  p.  208. 

6  Muratorius.     Ord.  Rom..   Tom.  I.,  col.  541. 

7  Mabillon.     Mus.  Ital.,    Tom.  I.,  p.  313  and  p.  3T6. 

"  Labbe  and  Cossart.     Concilia.,  Tom.  vij,  col.  1194. 

aCapit.  Keg.  Franc,  Tom.  I.,  p.  483. 

10  Fleury.    Hist.  Bed.,  Liv.  xlv.,  chap.  48. 


I.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  381  1G7 

So  firmly  resolved  was  the  Pope  that  the  clause  should  not  be  introduced  into  the  creed 
that  he  presented  two  silver  shields  to  the  Gonfessio  in  St.  Peter's  at  Rome,  on  one  of  which 
was  engraved  the  creed  in  Latin  and  on  the  other  in  Greet,  without  the  addition,  This  act  the 
Greeks  never  forgot  during  the  controversy.  Photius  refers  to  it  in  writing  to  the  Patriarch 
of  Acquileia.  About  two  centuries  later  St.  Peter  Damian l  mentions  them  as  still  in  place  ; 
and  about  two  centuries  later  on,  Veccur,  Patriarch  of  Constantinople,  declares  they  hung 
there  still.2 

It  was  not  till  1014  that  for  the  first  time  the  interpolated  creed  was  used  at  mass  with 
the  sanction  of  the  Pope.  In  that  year  Benedict  VIII.  acceded  to  the  urgent  request  of 
Henry  II.  of  Germany  and  so  the  papal  authority  was  forced  to  yield,  and  the  silver  shields 
have  disappeared  from  St.  Peter's. 

3.  Nothing  could  be  clearer  than  that  the  theologians  of  the  West  never  had  any  idea  of 
teaching  a  double  source  of  the  Godhead.  The  doctrine  of  the  Divine  Monarchy  was  always 
intended  to  be  preserved,  and  while  in  the  heat  of  the  controversy  sometimes  expressions 
highly  dangerous,  or  at  least  clearly  inaccurate,  may  have  been  used,  yet  the  intention  must 
be  judged  from  the  prevailing  teaching  of  the  approved  theologians.  And  what  this  was  is 
evident  from  the  definition  of  the  Council  of  Florence,  which,  while  indeed  it  was  not  received 
by  the  Eastern  Church,  and  therefore  cannot  be  accepted  as  an  authoritative  exposition  of 
its  views,  yet  certainly  must  be  regarded  as  a  true  and  full  expression  of  the  teaching  of  the 
West.  "  The  Greeks  asserted  that  when  they  say  the  Holy  Ghost  proceeds  from  the  Father, 
they  do  not  use  it  because  they  wish  to  exclude  the  Son ;  but  because  it  seemed  to  them,  as 
they  say,  that  the  Latins  assert  the  Holy  Spirit  to  proceed  from  the  Father  and  the  Son,  as 
from  two  principles  and  by  two  spirations,  and  therefore  they  abstain  from  saying  that  the 
Holy  Spirit  proceeds  from  the  Father  and  the  Son.  But  the  Latins  affirm  that  they  have  no 
intention  when  they  say  the  Holy  Ghost  proceeds  from  the  Father  and  the  Son  to  deprive 
the  Father  of  his  prerogative  of  being  the  fountain  and  principle  of  the  entire  Godhead,  viz. 
of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  nor  do  they  deny  that  the  very  procession  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  from  the  Son,  the  Son  derives  from  the  Father ;  nor  do  they  teach  two  principles  or 
two  spirations  ;  but  they  assert  that  there  is  one  only  principle,  one  only  spiration,  as  they 
have  always  asserted  up  to  this  time." 

4.  It  is  quite  possible  that  when  these  words  were  first  used  there  was  no  knowledge  on 
the  part  of  those  using  them  that  there  had  been  made  any  addition  to  the  Creed.  As  I  have 
already  pointed  out,  the  year  589  is  the  earliest  date  at  which  Ave  find  the  words  actually 
introduced  into  the  Creed.  Now  there  can  be  no  doubt  whatever  that  the  Council  of  Toledo 
of  that  year  had  no  suspicion  that  the  creed  as  they  had  it  was  not  the  creed  exactly  as 
adopted  at  Constantinople.     This  is  capable  of  the  most  ample  proof. 

In  the  first  place  they  declared,  "  Whosoever  believes  that  there  is  any  other  Catholic 
faith  and  communion,  besides  that  of  the  Universal  Church,  that  Church  which  holds  and 
honours  the  decrees  of  the  Councils  of  Nice,  Constantinople,  I.  Ephesus,  and  Chalcedon, 
let  him  be  anathema."  After  some  further  anathemas  in  the  same  sense  they  repeat  "  the 
creed  published  at  the  council  of  Nice,"  and  next,  "  The  holy  faith  which  the  150  fathers  of 
the  Council  of  Constantinople  explained,  consonant  with  the  great  Council  of  Nice."  And 
then  lastly,  "  The  holy  faith  which  the  translators  of  the  council  of  Chalcedon  explained." 
The  creed  of  Constantinople  as  recited  contained  the  words  "and  from  the  Son."  Now  the 
fathers  at  Toledo  were  not  ignorant  of  the  decree  of  Ephesus  forbidding  the  making  of  "  an- 
other faith  "  (kripav  ttio-tlv)  for  they  themselves  cite  it,  as  follows  from  the  acts  of  Chalcedon  ; 
"  The  holy  and  universal  Synod  forbids  to  bring  forward  any  other  faith ;  or  to  write  or 

1  Pet.  Damiau.     Opusc,  sxxviij.  2  Leo  Allat.    Grtec.  Orthod.,  Tom.  I„  p.  173. 


168  I.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  381 


believe  or  to  teach  other,  or  be  otherwise  minded.  But  whoso  shall  dare  either  to  expound 
or  produce  or  deliver  any  other  faith  to  those  who  wish  to  be  converted  etc."  Upon  this 
Dr.  Pusey  well  remarks,1  "  It  is,  of  course,  impossible  to  suppose  that  they  can  have  believed 
any  addition  to  the  creed  to  have  been  forbidden  by  the  clause,  and,  accepting  it  with  its 
anathema,  themselves  to  have  added  to  the  creed  of  Constantinople." 

But  while  this  is  the  case  it  might  be  that  they  understood  frepav  of  the  Ephesine  decree 
to  forbid  the  making  of  contradictory  and  new  creeds  and  not  explanatory  additions  to  the 
existing  one.  Of  this  interpretation  of  the  decree,  which  would  seem  without  any  doubt  to 
be  the  only  tenable  one,  I  shall  treat  in  its  proper  place. 

We  have  however  further  proof  that  the  Council  of  Toledo  thought  they  were  using  the 
unaltered  creed  of  Constantinople.  In  these  acts  we  find  they  adopted  the  following  ;  "for 
reverence  of  the  most  holy  faith  and  for  the  strengthening  of  the  weak  minds  of  men,  the 
holy  Synod  enacts,  with  the  advice  of  our  most  pious  and  most  glorious  Lord,  King  Re- 
carede,  that  through  all  the  churches  of  Spain  and  Gallsecia,  the  symbol  of  faith  of  the  coun- 
cil of  Constantinople,  i.e.  of  the  150  bishops,  should  be  recited  according  to  the  form  of  the 
Eastern  Church,  etc." 

This  seems  to  make  the  matter  clear  and  the  next  question  which  arises  is,  How  the  words 
could  have  got  into  the  Spanish  creed?  I  venture  to  suggest  a  possible  explanation. 
Epiphanius  tells  us  that  in  the  year  374  "  all  the  orthodox  bishops  of  the  whole  Catholic 
Church  together  make  this  address  to  those  who  come  to  baptism,  in  order  that  they  may 
proclaim  and  say  as  follows."  ~  If  this  is  to  be  understood  literally  of  course  Spain  was 
included.  Now  the  creed  thus  taught  the  catechumens  reads  as  follows  at  the  point  about 
which  our  interest  centres  : 

Ken  ets  to  ayiov  Tryeu/xa  TTiaTevofid',  «k  tov  7rarpos  iKiropevoiieiov  kcu  Ik  tov  Ytov  Xa.jxfio.v6' 

l±evov  i<a\  Ttio-Tevofjievov,  eis/aW  KaSoXiKyv  k.  t.  X.  Now  it  looks  to  me  as  if  the  text  had  got  cor- 
rupted and  that  there  should  be  a  full  stop  after  Xap.pav6fj.evov,  and  that  7no-T€v6p.evov  should 
be  TTLo-Tcvofj.ev.  These  emendations  are  not  necessary  however  for  my  suggestion  although 
they  would  make  it  more  perfect,  for  in  that  case  by  the  single  omission  of  the  word 
Xap.j3av6fj.evov  the  Western  form  is  obtained.  It  will  be  noticed  that  this  was  some  years 
before  the  Constantinopolitan  Council  and  therefore  nothing  would  be  more  natural  than 
that  a  scribe  accustomed  to  writing  the  old  baptismal  creed  and  now  given  the  Constantino- 
politan creed,  so  similar  to  it,  to  copy,  should  have  gone  on  and  added  the  ko.1  Ik  tov  Ylov, 
according  to  habit. 

However  this  is  a  mere  suggestion,  I  think  I  have  shewn  that  there  is  strong  reason  to 
believe  that  whatever  the  explanation  may  be,  the  Spanish  Church  was  unaware  that  it  had 
added  to  or  changed  the  Constantinopolitan  creed. 

5.  There  remains  now  only  the  last  point,  which  is  the  most  important  of  all,  but  which 
does  not  belong  to  the  subject  matter  of  this  volume  and  which  therefore  I  shall  treat  with 
the  greatest  brevity.  The  writings  of  St.  John  Damascene  are  certainly  deemed  entirely  or- 
thodox by  the  Easterns  and  always  have  been.  On  the  other  hand  their  entire  orthodoxy 
has  never  been  disputed  in  the  West,  but  a  citation  from  Damascene  is  considered  by  St. 
Thomas  as  conclusive.  Under  these  circumstances  it  seems  hard  to  resist  the  conclusion 
that  the  faith  of  the  East  and  the  West,  so  far  as  its  official  setting  forth  is  concerned,  is  the 
same  and  always  has  been.  And  perhaps  no  better  proof  of  the  Western  acceptance  of  the 
Eastern  doctrine  concerning  the  eternal  procession  of  the  Holy  Spirit  can  be  found  than  the 
fact  that  St.  John  Damascene  has  been  in  recent  years  raised  by  the  pope  for  his  followers  to 
the  rank  of  a  Doctor  of  the  Catholic  Church. 

1  B.  B.  Pusey.    On  the  clause,  "  and  the  Son,"  p.  48.  B Epiphanius,    Ancoralits,  ess. 


I.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  381 


169 


Perhaps  I  may  be  allowed  to  close  with  two  moderate  statements  of  the  Western  posi- 
tion, the  one  by  the  learned  and  pions  Dr.  Pusey  and  the  other  by  the  none  less  famous 
Bishop  Pearson. 

Dr.  Pusey  says  : 

"  Since,  however,  the  clause,  which  found  its  way  into  the  Creed,  was,  in  the  first  instance, 
admitted,  as  being  supposed  to  be  part  of  the  Constantinopolitan  Creed,  and,  since  after  it 
had  been  rooted  for  200  years,  it  was  not  uprooted,  for  fear  of  uprooting  also  or  perplexing 
the  faith  of  the  people,  there  Avas  no  fault  either  in  its  first  reception  or  in  its  subsequent 
retention. 

"The  Greeks  would  condemn  forefathers  of  their  own,  if  they  were  to  pronounce  the 
clause  to  be  heretical.  For  it  would  be  against  the  principles  of  the  Church  to  be  in  com- 
munion with  an  heretical  body.  But  from  the  deposition  of  Photius,  a.d.  886  to  at  least 
a.d.  1009,  East  and  West  retained  their  own  expression  of  faith  without  schism.1 

"  A.D.  1077,  Theophylact  did  not  object  to  the  West,  retaining  for  itself  the  confession 
of  faith  contained  in  the  words,  but  only  excepted  against  the  insertion  of  the  words  in  the 
Creed."2 

And  Bp.  Pearson,  explaining  Article  VIII.  of  the  Creed  says :  "  Now  although  the  ad- 
dition of  words  to  the  formal  Creed  without  the  consent,  and  against  the  £>ro testations  of 
the  Oriental  Church  be  not  justifiable  ;  yet  that  which  was  added  is  nevertheless  a  certain 
truth,  and  may  be  so  used  in  that  Creed  by  them  who  believe  the  same  to  be  a  truth  ;  so 
long  as  they  pretend  it  not  to  be  a  definition  of  that  Council,  but  an  addition  or  explication 
inserted,  and  condemn  not  those  who,  out  of  a  greater  respect  to  such  synodical  determina- 
tions, will  admit  of  no  such  insertions,  nor  speak  any  other  language  than  the  Scriptures 
and  their  Fathers  spake." 

HISTORICAL  NOTE  ON  THE  LOST   "TOME"  OF  THE  SECOND   COUNCIL. 

We  know  from  the  Synodical  letter  sent  by  the  bishops  who  assembled  at  Constantinople 
in  a.d.  382  (the  next  year  after  the  Second  Ecumenical  Council)  sent  to  Pope  Damasus  and 
other  Western  bishops,  that  the  Second  Council  set  forth  a  "  Tome,"  containing  a  statement 
of  the  doctrinal  points  at  issue.  This  letter  will  be  found  in  full  at  the  end  of  the  treatment 
of  this  council.  The  Council  of  Chalcedon  in  its  address  to  the  Emperor  says  :  "  The  bishops 
who  at  Constantinople  detected  the  taint  of  Apollinarianism,  communicated  to  the  Westerns 
their  decision  in  the  matter."  From  this  we  may  reasonably  conclude,  with  Tillemont,3 
that  the  lost  Tome  treated  also  of  the  Apollinarian  heresy.  It  is  moreover  by  no  means 
unlikely  that  the  Creed  as  it  has  come  down  to  us,  was  the  summary  at  the  end  of  the  Tome, 
and  was  followed  by  the  anathemas  which  now  form  our  Canon  I.  It  also  is  likely  that 
the  very  accurate  doctrinal  statements  contained  in  the  Letter  of  the  Synod  of  382  may  be 
taken  almost,  if  not  quite,  verbatim  from  this  Tome.  It  seems  perfectly  evident  that  at  least 
one  copy  of  the  Tome  was  sent  to  the  West  but  how  it  got  lost  is  a  matter  on  which  at  pres- 
ent we  are  entirely  in  the  dark. 


1  Peter  of  Antioch  about  a.d.  1054,  says  that  he  had  heard  the 
name  of  the  Roman  Pontiff  recited  from  the  Diptychs  at  the  mass 
at  Constantinople  forty-five  years  before.    Le  Quien,  p.  xii. 


2  E.  B.  Pusey.     On  the  clause  "and  the  Son," p.  72. 

3  Tillemont.    Memoircs,  Tom.  is.,  art.  78,  in  the  treatise  on  St. 
Greg.  Nonz. 


LETTEB  OF  THE  SAME  HOLY  SYNOD  TO  THE  MOST  PIOUS  EMPEBOR 
THEODOSIUS  THE  GREAT,  TO  WHICH  ARE  APPENDED  THE  CANONS 
ENACTED  BY  THEM. 

{Found  in  Labbe,  Concilia,  Tom.  II ,  Olfi.) 

To  the  most  religious  Emperor  Theodosins,  the  Holy  Synod  of  Bishops  assembled 
in  Constantinople  out  of  different  Provinces. 

"We  begin  our  letter  to  your  Piety  with  thanks  to  God,  who  has  established  the  empire 
of  your  Piety  for  the  common  peace  of  the  Churches  and  for  the  support  of  the  true 
Faith.  And,  after  rendering  due  thanks  unto  God,  as  in  duty  bound  we  lay  before 
your  Piety  the  things  which  have  been  done  in  the  Holy  Synod.  When,  then,  we  had 
assembled  in  Constantinople,  according  to  the  letter  of  your  Piety,  we  first  of  all  renewed 
our  unity  of  heart  each  with  the  other,  and  then  we  pronounced  some  concise  definitions, 
ratifying  the  Faith  of  the  Nicene  Fathers,  and  anathematizing  the  heresies  which  have 
sprung  up,  contrary  thereto.  Besides  these  things,  we  also  framed  certain  Canons  for 
the  better  ordering  of  the  Churches,  all  which  we  have  subjoined  to  this  our  letter. 
Wherefore  we  beseech  your  Piety  that  the  decree  of  the  Synod  may  be  ratified,  to  the 
end  that,  as  you  have  honoured  the  Church  by  your  letter  of  citation,  so  you  should  set 
your  seal  to  the  conclusion  of  what  has  been  decreed.  May  the  Lord  establish  your 
empire  in  peace  and  righteousness,  and  prolong  it  from  generation  to  generation ;  and 
may  he  add  unto  your  earthly  power  the  fruition  of  the  heavenly  kingdom  also.  May 
God  by  the  pra}Ters  {ev^a-h  rwv  dytcov)  of  the  Saints,1  shew  favour  to  the  world,  that  you 
may  be  strong  and  eminent  in  all  good  things  as  an  Emperor  most  truly  pious  and 
beloved  of  God. 

1  On  the  whole  subject  of  the  prayers  of  the  Saints  see  H.  R.  j  devoted  to  an  historical  and  theological  consideration  of  the  sub- 
Perciva',,  The  Invocation  of  Saints.    (Longmans.  London,  1S9G.)     ject.    Of  course  the  subject  is  treated  of  cursorily  in  numerous 

I  have  the  less  hesitation  in  referring  to  my  own  work  as  it  is,  I  theological  treatises  and  dictionaries, 
so  far  as  I  can  discover,  the  only  book  in  the  English  language  | 


INTEODUCTION  ON  THE  NUMBER  OF  THE  CANONS. 

(Hefele,  History  of  the   Councils,  Vol.  II.,  p.  351.) 

The  number  of  canons  drawn  up  by  this  synod  is  doubtful.  The  old  Greek  codices  and 
the  Greek  commentators  of  the  Middle  Ages,  Zonaras  and  Balsamon,  enumerate  seven  ;  but 
the  old  Latin  translations — viz.  the  Prisca,  those  by  Dionysius  Exiguus  and  Isidore,  as  well 
as  the  Codex  of  Luna — only  recognize  the  first  four  canons  of  the  Greek  text,  and  the  fact 
that  they  agree  in  this  point  is  the  more  important  as  they  are  wholly  independent  of  each 
other,  and  divide  and  arrange  those  canons  of  Constantinople  which  they  do  acknowledge 
quite  differently. 

Because,  however,  in  the  Prisca  the  canons  of  Constantinople  are  only  placed  after  those 
of  the  fourth  General  Council,  the  Ballerini  brothers  conclude  that  they  were  not  contained 
at  all  in  the  oldest  Greek  collections  of  canons,  and  were  inserted  after  the  Council  of  Chal- 
cedon.  But  it  was  at  this  very  Council  of  Chalcedon  that  the  first  three  canons  of  Constan- 
tinople were  read  out  word  for  word.  As  however,  they  were  not  separately  numbered,  but 
were  there  read  under  the  general  title  of  Synodicon  Synodi  Secunda?,  Fuchs  concluded  that 
they  were  not  originally  in  the  form  in  which  we  now  possess  them,  but,  without  being  di- 
vided into  numbers,  formed  a  larger  and  unbroken  decree,  the  contents  of  which  were  divided 
by  later  copyists  and  translators  into  several  different  canons.  And  hence  the  very  different 
divisions  of  these  canons  in  the  Prisca,  Dionysius,  and  Isidore  may  be  explained.  The  fact, 
however,  that  the  old  Latin  translations  all  agree  in  only  giving  the  first  four  canons  of  the 
Greek  text,  seems  to  show  that  the  oldest  Greek  manuscripts,  from  which  those  translations 
were  made,  did  not  contain  the  fifth,  sixth,  and  seventh,  and  that  these  last  did  not  properly 
belong  to  this  Synod,  but  were  later  additions.  To  this  must  be  added  that  the  old  Greek 
Church-historians,  in  speaking  of  the  affairs  of  the  second  General  Council,  only  mention 
those  points  which  are  contained  in  the  first  four  canons,  and  say  nothing  of  what,  accord- 
ing to  the  fifth,  sixth,  and  seventh  canons,  had  also  been  decided  at  Constantinople.  At  the 
very  least,  the  seventh  canon  cannot  have  emanated  from  this  Council,  since  in  the  sixth  cen- 
tury John  Scholasticus  did  not  receive  it  into  his  collection,  although  he  adopted  the  fifth 
and  sixth.  It  is  also  missing  in  many  other  collections  ;  and  in  treating  specially  of  this 
canon  further  on,  we  shall  endeavour  to  show  the  time  and  manner  of  its  origin.  But  the 
fifth  and  sixth  canons  probably  belong  to  the  Synod  of  Constantinople  of  the  following  year, 
as  Beveridge,  the  Ballerini,  and  others  conjectured.  The  Greek  scholiasts,  Zonaras  and 
Balsamon,  and  later  on  Tillemont,  Beveridge,  Van  Espen  and  Herbst,  have  given  more  or  less 
detailed  commentaries  on  all  these  canons. 


CANONS  OF  THE  ONE  HUNDRED  AND  FIFTY  FATHERS 
WHO  ASSEMBLED  AT  CONSTANTINOPLE  DURING  THE 
CONSULATE  OF  THOSE  ILLUSTRIOUS  MEN,  FLAVIUS 
EUCHERIUS  AND  FLAVIUS  EVAGRIUS  ON  THE  VII 
OF  THE   IDES   OF   JULY.1 

The  Bishops  out  of  different  provinces  assembled  by  the  grace  of  God  in  Constan- 
tinople, on  the  summons  of  the  most  religious  Emperor  Theodosius,  have  decreed  as 
follows  : 

CANON  I. 

The  Faith  of  the  Three  Hundred  and  Eighteen  Fathers  assembled  at  Nice  in  Bithy- 
nia  shall  not  be  set  aside,  but  shall  remain  firm.  And  every  heresy  shall  be  anathema- 
tized, particularly  that  of  the  Eunomians  or  [Anomteans,  the  Avians  or]  Eudoxians,  and 
that  of  the  Semi-Arians  or  Pneumatomachi,  and  that  of  the  Sabellians,  and  that  of  the 
Marcellians,  and  that  of  the  Photinians,  and  that  of  the  Apollinarians. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  I. 


Let  the  Niccne  faith  stand  firm.     Anathema 
to  heresy. 


ties  with  the  Arians  [according  to  his  text, 
vide  siqjra,]  is  meant  that  faction  who,  in  con- 
tradistinction to  the  strict  Arians  or  Anompc- 
ans  on  one  side,  and  the  Semi-Arians  on  the 
There  is  a  difference  of  reading  in  the  list  I  other  side,  followed  the  leadership  of  the 
of  the  heretics.  The  reading  I  have  followed  Court  Bishop  Eudoxius  (Bishop  of  Constan- 
in  the  text  is  that  given  in  Beveridge's  Sy-  tinople  under  the  Emperor  Valens),  and  with- 
nodicon.  The  Creek  text,  however,  in  Labbe,  |  out  being  entirely  Anomsean,  yet  very  decid- 
and  with  it  agree  the  version  of  Hervetus  and  :  edly  inclined  to  the  left  of  the  Arian  party— 
the  text  of  Hefele,  reads  :  "  the  Eunomians  or  j  probably  claiming  to  represent  the  old  and 
Anomseans,  the  Arians  or  Eudoxians,  the  Semi- 1  original  Arianism.  But  this  canon  makes 
Arians  or  Pneumatomachi,  the  Sabellians,  ;  the  Semi-Arians  identical  with  the  Pneuma- 
Marcellians,  Photinians  and  Apollinarians."  |  tomachians,  and  so  far  rightly,  that  the  latter 
From  this  Dionysius  only  varies  by  substi-  J  sprang  from  the  Semi-Arian  party,  and  ap- 
tuting  "Macedonians  "  for  "Semi-Arians."  j  plied  the  Arian  principle  to  their  doctrine  of 
It  would  seem  that  this  was  the  correct  read-  j  the  Holy  Ghost.  Lastly,  by  the  Marcellians 
ing.     I,  however,  have  followed  the  other  as  |  are  meant  those  pupils  of  Marcellus  of  Ancy- 

ra  who  remained  in  the  errors  formerly  pro- 
pounded by  him,  while  afterwards  others, 
and  indeed  he  himself,  once  more  acknowl- 


being  the  more  usual. 

Hefele. 


By  the  Eudoxians,  whom  this  canon  identi-    edged  the  truth. 

EXCURSUS  ON  THE  HERESIES  CONDEMNED  IN  CANON  1 

In  treating  of  these  heresies  I  shall  invert  the  order  of  the  canon,  and  shall  speak  of  the 
Macedonian  and  Apollinarian  heresies  first,  as  being  most  nearly  connected  with  the  object 
for  which  the  Constantinopolitan  Synod  was  assembled. 

The  Semi-Arians,  Macedonians  or  Pneumatomachi. 

Peace  indeed  seemed  to  have  been  secured  by  the  Nicene  decision  but  there  was  an  ele 
ment  of  discord  still  extant,  and  so  shortly  afterwards  as  in  359  the  double-synod  of  Rimini 

1  Such  is  the  caption  in  the  old  Greek  codices.    The  vijth  of  I  that  this  synod  which  according  to  Socrates        E.,  v.  8)  begun 
the  Ides  is  July  9th.    "  From  this  (says  Hefele)  we  may  conclude  \  May  381,  lasted  until  July  of  that  year." 


I.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  381  173 

(Ariminuin)  and  Selencia  rejected  the  expressions  homousion  and  liomosusion  equally,  and 
Jerome  gave  birth  to  his  famous  phrase,  "  the  world  awoke  to  find  itself  Arian."  The  cause 
of  this  was  the  weight  attaching  to  the  Semi-Arian  party,  which  counted  among  its  numbers 
men  of  note  and  holiness,  such  as  St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem.  Of  the  developments  of  this  party 
it  seems  right  that  some  mention  should  be  made  in  this  place,  since  it  brought  forth  the. 
Macedonian  heresy. 

(Wm.  Bright,  D.D.,  St.  Leo  on  the  Incarnation,  pp.  213  et  seqq.) 
The  Semi-Arian  party  in  the  fourth  century  attempted  to  steer  a  middle  course  between 
calling  the  Son  Consubstantial  and  calling  him  a  creature.  Their  position,  indeed,  was 
untenable,  but  several  persisted  in  clinging  to  it ;  and  it  was  adopted  by  Macedonius,  who 
occupied  the  see  of  Constantinople.  It  was  through  their  adoption  of  a  more  reverential 
language  about  the  Son  than  had  been  used  by  the  old  Arians,  that  what  is  called  the  Mace- 
donian heresy  showed  itself.  Arianism  had  spoken  both  of  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Spirit  as 
creatures.  The  Macedonians,  rising  up  out  of  Semi-Arianism,  gradually  reached  the  Church's 
belief  as  to  the  uncreated  majesty  of  the  Son,  even  if  they  retained  their  objection  to  the 
homoousion  as  a  formula.  But  having,  in  their  previously  Semi-Arian  position,  refused  to 
extend  their  own  "  homoiousion  "  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  they  afterwards  persisted  in  regarding 
him  as  "  external  to  the  one  indivisible  Godhead,"  Newman's  Avians,  p.  226  ;  or  as  Tille- 
mont  says  {Man.  vi.,  527),  "  the  denial  of  the  divinity  of  the  Holy  Spirit  was  at  last  their 
capital  or  only  error."  St.  Athanasius,  while  an  exile  under  Constantius  for  the  second 
time,  "heard  with  pain,"  as  he  says  (Ep.  i.  ad  Serap.,  1)  that  "some  who  had  left  the  Arians 
from  disgust  at  their  blasphemy  against  the  Son  of  God,  yet  called  the  Spirit  a  creature,  and 
one  of  the  ministering  spirits,  differing  only  in  degree  from  the  Angels  :  "  and  soon  after- 
wards, in  362,  the  Council  of  Alexandria  condemned  the  notion  that  the  Spirit  was  a  creat- 
ure, as  being  "  no  true  avoidance  of  the  detestable  Arian  heresy."  See  "  Later  Treatises  of 
St.  Athanasius,"  p.  5.  Athanasius  insisted  that  the  Nicene  Fathers,  although  silent  on  the 
nature  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  had  by  implication  ranked  him  with  the  Father  and  the  Son  as  an 
object  of  belief  (ad  Afros,  11).  After  the  death  of  St.  Athanasius,  the  new  heresy  was  re- 
jected on  behalf  of  the  West  by  Pope  Damasus,  who  declared  the  Spirit  to  be  truly  and 
properly  from  the  Father  (as  the  Son  from  the  Divine  substance)  and  very  God,  "  omnia 
posse  et  omnia  nosse,  et  ubique  esse,"  coequal  and  adorable  (Mansi,  iii.,  483).  The  Illyrian 
bishops  also,  in  374,  wrote  to  the  bishops  of  Asia  Minor,  affirming  the  consubstantiality  of 
the  Three  Divine  Persons  (Theodoret,  H.  E.,  iv.,  9).  St.  Basil  wrote  his  De  Spiritu  Sancto  in 
the  same  sense  (see  Swete,  Early  History  of  the  Doctrine  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  pp.  58,  67),  and 
in  order  to  vindicate  this  truth  against  the  Pneumatomachi,  as  the  Macedonians  were  called 
by  the  Catholics,  the  Constantinopolitan  recension  of  the  Nicene  Creed  added  the  words, 
'•'  the  Lord  and  the  Life-givei",  proceeding  from  the  Father,  with  the  Father  and  the  Son 
worshipped  and  glorified  "  etc.,  which  had  already  formed  part  of  local  Creeds  in  the  East. 

From  the  foregoing  by  Canon  Bright,  the  reader  will  be  able  to  understand  the  connex- 
ion between  the  Semi-Arians  and  Pneumatomachi,  as  well  as  to  see  how  the  undestroyed 
heretical  germs  of  the  Semi-Arian  heresy  necessitated  by  their  development  the  condemna- 
tion of  a  second  synod. 

The  Apollinarians. 
(Philip  Schaff,  in  Smith  and  Wace,  Diet.  Christ.  Biog.,  s.  v.  Apollinaris.) 
Apollinaris  was  the  first  to  apply  the  results  of  the  Nicene  controversy  to  Christology 
proper,  and  to  call  the  attention  of  the  Church  to  the  psychical  and  pneumatic  element  in 
the  humanity  of  Christ ;  but  in  his  zeal  for  the  true  deity   of  Christ,  and  fear  of  a  double 


174  I.   CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  381 


personality,  he  fell  into  the  error  of  a  partial  denial  of  his  true  humanity.  Adopting  the 
psychological  trichotomy  of  Plato  (a-up-a,  ipvxq,  weii/Aa),  for  which  he  quoted  I.  Thess.  v.  23 
and  Gal.  v.  17,  he  attributed  to  Christ  a  human  body  (awp.a)  and  a  human  soul  (the  ^/v^q 
aAoyos,  the  anima  animans  which  man  has  in  common  with  the  animal),  but  not  a  rational 
spirit  (voEs,  Trvev/xa,  \pvxq  koyiKt],  anima  rationalis,)  and  put  in  the  place  of  the  latter  the  divine 
Logos.  In  opposition  to  the  idea  of  a  mere  connection  of  the  Logos  with  the  man  Jesus,  he 
wished  to  secure  an  organic  unity  of  the  two,  and  so  a  true  incarnation  ;  but  he  sought  this 
at  the  expense  of  the  most  important  constituent  of  man.  He  reached  only  a  ©cos  o-api<o<£dpos 
as  Nestorianism  only  an  aV#/3io7ros  Secxpopos  instead  of  the  proper  Sedv&pwros.  He  appealed 
to  the  fact  that  the  Scripture  says,  "the  Word  was  made  flesh" — not  spirit;  "God  was 
manifest  in  the  flesh  "  etc.  To  which  Gregory  Nazianzen  justly  replied  that  in  these  pas- 
sages the  term  adp$  was  used  by  synecdoche  for  the  whole  human  nature.  In  this  way  Apolli- 
naris  established  so  close  a  connection  of  the  Logos  with  human  flesh,  that  all  the  divine 
attributes  were  transferred  to  the  human  nature,  and  all  the  human  attributes  to  the  divine, 
and  the  two  merged  in  one  nature  in  Christ.  Hence  he  could  speak  of  a  crucifixion  of  the 
Logos,  and  a  worship  of  his  flesh.  He  made  Christ  a  middle  being  between  God  and  man, 
in  whom,  as  it  were,  one  part  divine  and  two  parts  human  were  fused  in  the  unity  of  a  new 
nature.  He  even  ventured  to  adduce  created  analogies,  such  as  the  mule,  midway  between 
the  horse  and  the  ass  ;  the  grey  colour,  a  mixture  of  white  and  black  ;  and  spring,  in  distinc- 
tion from  winter  and  summer.  Christ,  said  he,  is  neither  whole  man,  nor  God,  but  a  mixture 
(/Af|ts)  of  God  and  man.  On  the  other  hand,  he  regarded  the  orthodox  view  of  a  union  of  full 
humanity  with  a  full  divinity  in  one  person — of  two  wholes  in  one  whole — as  an  absurdit}'. 
He  called  the  result  of  this  construction  avSp-jmoStoi,  a  sort  of  monstrosity,  which  he  put  in 
the  same  category  with  the  mythological  figure  of  the  Minotaur.  But  the  Apollinarian  idea 
of  the  union  of  the  Logos  with  a  truncated  human  nature  might  be  itself  more  justly  com- 
pared with  this  monster.  Starting  from  the  Nicene  homoousion  as  to  the  Logos,  but  denying 
the  completeness  of  Christ's  humanity,  he  met  Arianism  half-way,  which  likewise  put  the 
divine  Logos  in  the  place  of  the  human  spirit  in  Christ.  But  he  strongly  asserted  his 
unchangeableness,  while  Arians  taught  his  changeableness  (Tpe-n-TOTvs). 

The  faith  of  the  Church  revolted  against  such  a  mutilated  and  stunted  humanity  of  Christ 
which  necessarily  involved  also  a  merely  partial  redemption.  The  incarnation  is  an  assump- 
tion of  the  entire  human  nature,  sin  only  excluded.  The  eYo-ap/cwcris  is  ivavSpdrtrqo-is.  To  be  a 
full  and  complete  Redeemer,  Christ  must  be  a  perfect  man  (rektios  avSpw-os).  The  spirit  or 
rational  soul  is  the  most  important  element  in  man,  his  crowning  glory,  the  seat  of  intelli- 
gence and  freedom,  and  needs  redemption  as  well  as  the  soul  and  the  body ;  for  sin  has 
entered  and  corrupted  all  the  faculties. 

In  the  sentence  immediately  preceding  the  above  Dr.  Schaff  remarks  "but  the  peculiar 
Christology  of  Apollinaris  has  reappeared  from  time  to  time  in  a  modified  shape,  as  isolated 
theological  opinion."  No  doubt  Dr.  Schaff  had  in  mind  the  fathers  of  the  so-called  "Ke- 
noticism  "  of  to-day,  Gess  and  Ebrard,  who  teach,  unless  they  have  been  misunderstood, 
that  the  incarnate  Son  had  no  human  intellect  or  rational  soul  (yovs)  but  that  the  divine  per- 
sonality took  its  place,  by  being  changed  into  it.  By  this  last  modification,  they  claim  to 
escape  from  the  taint  of  the  Apollinarian  heresy.1 

1  The  theological  views  of  Gess  and  Ebrard  I  know  only  from  |  dem  in's  Werden  eingegangenen  Logos  nuch  eiue  becondere 
the  statements  of  them  In  writers  on  the  subject  of  the  Incarna-  ,  menschliche  Seele  in  Jesn  war  ? "  (Gess.  Die  Lehre  v.  d.  Person 
tion,  especially  from  those  made  by  the  Rev.  A.  B.  Bruce,  D  D.,  i  Christi,  ii.,  p.  321.)  Bruce  understands  Gess  to  teach  that  "The 
Professor  at  Free  Church  College,  Glasgow,  in  his  work  "  The  only  difference  between  the  Logos  and  a  human  soul  was,  that  he 
Humiliation  of  Christ."  (Lecture  IV.)  The  following  passage  became  human  by  voluntary  kenosis,  while  an  ordinary  human 
(cited  by  Dr.  Bruce)  seems  to  prove  his  contention  so  far  soul  derives  its  existence  from  a  creative  act."  (And  refers  to 
as  Gess  is  concerned.  "  Dass  eine  wahrhaft  menschliche  Seele  :  Gess,  vt  supra,  p.  325  et  seqq.)  For  Ebrard's  view,  see  his  Cluisl- 
ih  .Tesu  war.  versteht  sich  f iir  und  von  selbt :  erwar  ja  sonst  kein  liche  Doginatik,  ii.,  p.  40.  Ritschl  dubbed  the  whole  kenotic 
wirklicher  Menseh.  Aher  die  Frage  ist,  ob  der  in's  Werden  theory  as  "  VerschSmter  Socinianismus." 
eingegangene  Logos  selbst  diese  menschliche  Seele,  Oder  ob  neben 


I.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  381  175 

The  Eunomians  or  Anomceans. 
(Bright,  Notes  on  the  Canons,  Canon  I.  of  I.  Const.) 
"  The  Eunomians  or  Anomceans."  These  were  the  ultra-Arians,  -who  carried  to  its  legitimate 
issue  the  original  Arian  denial  of  the  eternity  and  uncreatedness  of  the  Son,  while  they  further 
rejected  what  Arius  had  affirmed  as  to  the  essential  mysteriousness  of  the  Divine  nature 
(Soc,  H.  E.,  iv.,  7 ;  comp.  Athan.,  De  Synod.,  15).  Their  founder  was  Aetius,  the  most  versatile 
of  theological  adventurers  (cf.  Athan.,  De  Synod.,  31 ;  Soc,  //.  E.,  ii.,  45  ;  and  see  a  summary  of 
his  career  in  Newman's  Avians,  p.  347) ;  but  their  leader  at  the  time  of  the  Council  was  the 
daring  and  indefatigable  Eunomius  (for  whose  personal  characteristics,  see  his  admirer  Philos- 
torgius,  x„  6)  He,  too,  had  gone  through  many  vicissitudes  from  his  first  employment  as 
the  secretary  of  Aetius,  and  his  ordination  as  deacon  by  Eudoxius ;  as  bishop  of  Cyzicus,  he 
had  been  lured  into  a  disclosure  of  his  true  sentiments,  and  then  denounced  as  a  heretic 
(Theod.,  H.  E,,  ii.,  29)  ;  with  Aetius  he  had  openly  separated  from  Eudoxius  as  a  disingenuous 
time-server,  and  had  gone  into  retirement  at  Chalcedon  (Philostorg.,  ix.,  4).  The  distinctive 
formula  of  his  adherents  was  the  "Anomoion."  The  Son,  they  said,  was  not  "like  to  the 
Father  in  essence  "  ;  even  to  call  him  simply  "like  "  was  to  obscure  the  fact  that  he  was  sim- 
ply a  creature,  and,  as  such,  "  unlike "  to  his  Creator.  In  other  words,  they  thought  the 
Semi- Arian  "homoiousion"  little  better  than  the  Catholic  "  homoousion  "  :  the  "homoion" 
of  the  more  "respectable"  Arians  represented  in  their  eyes  an  ignoble  reticence  ;  the  plain 
truth,  however  it  might  shock  devout  prejudice,  must  be  put  into  words  which  would  bar 
all  misunderstanding  :  the  Son  might  be  called  "  God,"  but  in  a  sense  merely  titular,  so  as  to 
leave  an  impassable  gulf  between  him  and  the  uncreated  Godhead  (see  Eunomius's  Exposi- 
tion in  Valesius's  note  on  Soc,  H.  E.,  v.,  10).  Compare  Basil  (Epist.,  233,  and  his  work  against 
Eunomius),  and  Epiphanius  (Seer.,  76). 

The  Arians  or  Eudoxians. 
(Bright.  Ut  supra.) 
"  The  Arians  or  Eudoxians."  By  these  are  meant  the  ordinary  Arians  of  the  period,  or,  as 
they  may  be  called,  the  Acacian  party,  directed  for  several  years  by  the  essentially  worldly 
and  unconscientious  Eudoxius.  His  real  sympathies  were  with  the  Anomceans  (see  Tillemont, 
Memoires,  vi.,  423,  and  compare  his  profane  speech  recorded  by  Socrates,  H.  E.,  ii.,  43)  :  but, 
as  a  bishop  of  Constantinople,  he  felt  it  necessary  to  discourage  them,  and  to  abide  by  the 
vague  formula  invented  by  Acacius  of  Csesarea,  which  described  the  Son  as  "like  to  the 
Father,"  without  saying  whether  this  likeness  was  supposed  to  be  more  than  moral  (cf.  New- 
man, Arians,  p.  317),  so  that  the  practical  effect  of  this  "  homoion  "  was  to  prepare  the  way 
for  that  very  Anomceanism  which  its  maintainers  were  ready  for  political  purposes  to  disown. 

The  Sabellians. 
(Bright.  Ut  supra.) 
"  The  Sabellians,"  whose  theory  is  traceable  to  Noetus  and  Praxeas  in  the  latter  part  of  the 
second  century  :  they  regarded  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Spirit  as  aspects  and  modes  of,  or  as 
emanations  from,  the  One  Person  of  the  Father  (see  Newman's  Arians,  pp.  120  et  seqq.).  Such 
a  view  tended  directly  to  dissolve  Christian  belief  in  the  Trinity  and  in  the  Incarnation  ( Vide 
Wilberforce,  Incarnation,  pp.  112,  197).  Hence  the  gentle  Dionysius  of  Alexandria  charac- 
terised it  in  severe  terms  as  involving  "blasphemy,  unbelief,  and  irreverence,  towards  the 
Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit"  (Euseb.,  H.  E.,  vii..  G).  Hence  the  deep  repugnance 
which  it  excited,  and  the  facility  with  which  the  imputation  of  "  Sabellianizing  "  could  be 
utilised  by  the  Arians  against  maintainers  of  the  Consubstantiality  (Hilary,  De  Trinit.,  iv., 
4:  De  Synod.,  G8 ;  Fragm.,  11 ;  Basil,  Epist.,  189, 2).     No  organized  Sabellian  sect  was  in  exist- 


176  I.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  381 

ence  at  the  date  of  this  anathema  :  but  Sabellian  ideas  were  "  in  the  air,"  and  St.  Basil  could 
speak  of  a  revival  of  this  old  misbelief  (Epist.,  126).  We  find  it  again  asserted  by  Cbilperic 
I.,  King  of  Neustria,  in  the  latter  part  of  the  sixth  century  (Greg.  Turon,,  Hist.  Fr.,  v.,  45). 

The  Maecellians. 
(Bright.  Ut  supra.) 
"The  Marcellians,"  called  after  Marcellus  bishop  of  Ancyra,  who  was  persistently 
denounced  not  only  by  the  Arianizers,  but  by  St.  Basil,  and  for  a  time,  at  least,  suspected  by 
St.  Athanasius  {Vide  Epiphan.,  ifter.,  72,  4)  as  one  who  held  notions  akin  to  Sabellianism,  and 
fatal  to  a  true  belief  in  the  Divine  Sonship  and  the  Incarnation.  The  theory  ascribed  to  him 
was  that  the  Logos  was  an  impersonal  Divine  power,  immanent  from  eternity  in  God,  but 
issuing  from  him  in  the  act  of  creation,  and  entering  at  last  into  relations  with  the  human 
person  of  Jesus,  who  thus  became  God's  Son.  But  this  expansion  of  the  original  divine 
unity  would  be  followed  by  a  "contraction,"  when  the  Logos  would  retire  from  Jesus,  and 
God  would  again  be  all  in  all.  Some  nine  years  before  the  council,  Marcellus,  then  in  extreme 
old  age,  had  sent  his  deacon  Eugenius  to  St.  Athanasius,  with  a  written  confession  of  faith, 
quite  orthodox  as  to  the  eternity  of  the  Trinity,  and  the  identity  of  the  Logos  with  a  pre- 
existing and  personal  Son,  although  not  verbally  explicit  as  to  the  permanence  of  Christ's 
"kingdom," — the  point  insisted  on  in  one  of  theEpiphanian-Constantinopolitan  additions  to 
the  Creed  (Montfaucon,  Collect.  Nov.,  ii.,  1).  The  question  whether  Marcellus  was  personally 
heterodox — i.e.  whether  the  extracts  from  his  treatise,  made  by  his  adversary  Eusebius  of 
Csesarea,  give  a  fair  account  of  his  real  views — has  been  answered  unfavourably  by  some  writ- 
ers, as  Newman  (Athanasian  Treatises,  ii.,  200,  ed.  2),  and  Dollinger  (Hippolytus  and  Callistus, 
p.  217,  E.  T.  p.  201),  while  others,  like  Neale,  think  that  "charity  and  truth"  suggest  his 
"  acquittal "  (Hist.  Pair.  Antioch.,  p.  106).  Montfaucon  thinks  that  his  written  statements 
might  be  favourably  interpreted,  but  that  his  oral  statements  must  have  given  ground  for 
suspicion. 

The  Photinians. 

(Bright.  Ut  supra.) 
"  The  Photinians,"  or  followers  of  Marcellus's  disciple  Photinus,  bishop  of  Sirmium,  the 
ready-witted  and  pertinacious  disputant  whom  four  successive  synods  condemned  before  he 
could  be  got  rid  of,  by  State  power,  in  a.d.  351.  (See  St.  Athanasius's  Historical  Writings, 
Introd.  p.  lxxxix.)  In  his  representation  of  the  "Marcellian  "  theology,  he  laid  special  stress 
on  its  Christological  position— that  Jesus,  on  whom  the  Logos  rested  with  exceptional  fulness, 
was  a  mere  man.  See  Athanasius,  Be  Synodis,  26,  27,  for  two  creeds  in  which  Photinianism 
is  censured;  also  Soc.  H.  E.  ii.,  18,  29,  30  ;  vii.,  32.  There  is  an  obvious  affinity  between  it 
and  the  "  Samosatene  "  or  Paulionist  theory. 

CANON  II. 

The  bishops  are  not  to  go  beyond  their  dioceses  to  churches  lying  outside  of  their 
bounds,  nor  bring  confusion  on  the  churches ;  but  let  the  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  accord- 
ing to  the  canons,  alone  administer  the  affairs  of  Egypt ;  and  let  the  bishops  of  the 
East  manage  the  East  alone,  the  privileges  of  the  Church  in  Antioch,  which  are  _  men- 
tioned in  the  canons  of  Nice,  being  preserved  ;  and  let  the  bishops  of  the  Asian  Diocese 
administer  the  Asian  affairs  only ;  and  the  Pontic  bishops  only  Pontic  matters ;  and 
the  Thracian  bishops  only  Thracian  affairs.  And  let  not  bishops  go  beyond  their 
dioceses  for  ordination  or  any  other  ecclesiastical  ministrations,  unless  they  be  invited. 
And  the  aforesaid  canon  concerning  dioceses  being  observed,  it  is  evident  that  the 


I.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  381 


177 


synod  of  every  province  will  administer  the  affairs  of  that  particular  province  as  was 
decreed  at  Nice.  Bnt  the  Churches  of  God  in  heathen  nations  must  be  governed 
according  to  the  custom  which  has  prevailed  from  the  times  of  the  Fathers. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  II. 

No  traveller  shall  introduce  confusion  into 
the  Churches  either  by  ordaining  or  by  en- 
throning. Nevertheless  in  Churches  which  are 
among  the  heathen  the  tradition  of  the  Fathers 
shall  be  preserved. 

In  the  above  Ancient  Epitome  it  will  he 
noticed  that  not  only  is  ordination  mentioned 
hut  also  the  "  inthronization "  of  bishops. 
Few  ceremonies  are  of  greater  antiquity  in 
the  Christian  Church  than  the  solemn  plac- 
ing of  the  newly  chosen  bishop  in  the  episco- 
pal chair  of  his  diocese.  It  is  mentioned 
in  the  Apostolical  Constitutions,  and  in  the 
Greek  Pontificals.  Also  in  the  Arabic  ver- 
sion of  the  Nicene  Canons.  (No.  lxxi.).  A  ser- 
mon was  usually  delivered  by  the  newly 
consecrated  bishop,  called  the  "  sermo  en- 
thronisticus."  He  also  sent  to  neighbouring 
bishops  avWafiai  ii'Spovia-TiKal,  and  the  fees 
the  new  bishops  paid  were  called  to.  IvSpon- 

CTTlKa. 

Valesius. 
(Note  on  Socrates,  H.E.  v.,  8). 
This  rule  seems  to  have  been  made  chiefly 
on  account  of  Meletius,  Bishop  of  Antioch, 
Gregory  Nazianzen,  and  Peter  of  Alexandria. 
For  Meletius  leaving  the  Eastern  diocese  had 
come  to  Constantinople  to  ordain  Gregory 
bishop  there.  And  Gregory  having  aban- 
doned the  bishoprick  of  Sasima,  which  was 
in  the  Pontic  diocese,  had  removed  to  Con- 
stantinople. While  Peter  of  Alexandria  had 
sent  to  Constantinople  seven  Egyptian  bishops 
to  ordain  Maximus  the  Cynic.  For  the  pur- 
pose therefore  of  repressing  these  [disorders], 
the  fathers  of  the  Synod  of  Constantinople 
made  this  canon. 

Balsamon. 

Take  notice  from  the  present  canon  that 
formerly  all  the  Metropolitans  of  provinces 
were  themselves  the  heads  of  their  own  prov- 
inces, and  were  ordained  by  their  own  synods. 
But  all  this  was  changed  by  Canon  xxviij  of 
the  Synod  of  Chalcedon,  which  directs  that 
the  Metropolitans  of  the  dioceses  of  Pontus, 
Asia,  and  Thrace,  and  C3rtain  others  which 
are    mentioned    in    this    Canon    should    be 

VOL.    XIV, 


ordained  by  the  Patriarch  of  Constantinople 
and  should  be  subject  to  him.  But  if  you 
find  other  churches  which  are  autocephalous 
as  the  Church  of  Bulgaria,  of  Cyprus,  of 
Iberia,  you  need  not  be  astonished.  For  the 
Emperor  Justinian  gave  this  honour  to  the 
Archbishop  of  Bulgaria.  .  .  .  The  third 
Synod  gave  this  honour  to  the  Archbishop  of 
Cyprus,  and  by  the  law  of  the  same  synod 
(Canon  viii.),  and  by  the  Sixth  Synod  in  its 
xxxixth  Canon,  the  judgment  of  the  Synod  of 
Antioch  is  annulled  and  this  honour  granted 
to  the  bishop  of  Iberia. 

Tillemont. 
(Mem.  ix.,  489). 

The  Council  seems  likewise  to  reject, 
whether  designedly  or  inadvertently,  what 
had  been  ordained  by  the  Council  of  Sardica 
in  favour  of  Rome.  But  as  assuredly  it  did 
not  affect  to  prevent  either  Ecumenical  Coun- 
cils, or  even  general  Councils  of  the  East, 
from  judging  of  matters  brought  before  them, 
so  I  do  not  know  if  one  may  conclude  abso- 
lutely that  they  intended  to  forbid  appeals  to 
Rome.  It  regulates  proceedings  between  Di- 
oceses, but  not  what  might  concern  superior 
tribunals. 

Fleuky. 
(Hist.  Eccl.  in  loc). 

This  Canon,  which  gives  to  the  councils  of 
particular  places  full  authority  in  Ecclesiasti- 
cal matters,  seems  to  take  away  the  power  of 
appealing  to  the  Pope  granted  by  the  Coun- 
cil -of  Sardica,  and  to  restore  the  ancient 
right. 

Hefele. 

An  exception  to  the  rule  against  interfer- 
ence in  other  patriarchates  was  made  with 
regard  to  those  Churches  newly  founded 
amongst  barbarous  nations  (not  belonging  to 
the  Roman  Empire),  as  these  were  of  course 
obliged  to  receive  their  first  bishops  from 
strange  patriarchates,  and  remained  after- 
wards too  few  in  number  to  form  patriarch- 
ates of  their  own  and  were  therefore  governed 
as  belonging  to  other  patriarchates,  as,  for 
instance,  Abyssinia  by  the  patriarchate  of 
Alexandria. 


178 


I.  CONSTANTINOPLE.    A.D,  381 


CANON   III. 

The  Bishop  of  Constantinople,  however,  shall  have  the  prerogative  of  honour  after 
the  Bishop  of  Home  j  because  Constantinople  is  New  Borne. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  III. 


The  bishop  of  Constantinople  is  to  be  honoured 
next  after  the  bishop  of  Borne. 

It  should  be  remembered  that  the  change 
effected  by  this  canon  did  not  affect  Rome 
directly  in  any  way,  but  did  seriously  affect 
Alexandria  and  Antioch,  which  till  then  had 
ranked  next  after  the  see  of  Rome.  When 
the  pope  refused  to  acknowledge  the  author- 
ity of  this  canon,  he  was  in  reality  defending 
the  principle  laid  down  in  the  canon  of  Nice, 
that  in  such  matters  the  ancient  customs 
should  continue.  Even  the  last  clause,  it 
would  seem,  could  give  no  offence  to  the  most 
sensitive  on  the  papal  claims,  for  it  implies  a 
wonderful  power  in  the  rank  of  Old  Rome,  if 
a  see  is  to  rank  next  to  it  because  it  happens 
to  be  "  New  Rome. "  Of  course  these  remarks 
only  refer  to  the  wording  of  the  canon  which 
is  carefully  guarded  ;  the  intention  doubtless 
was  to  exalt  the  see  of  Constantinople,  the 
chief  see  of  the  East,  to  a  position  of  as  near 
equality  as  possible  with  the  chief  see  of  the 
West. 

ZONAEAS. 

In  this  place  the  Council  takes  action  con- 
cerning Constantinople,  to  which  it  decrees 
the  prerogative  of  honour,  the  priority,  and 
the  glory  after  the  Bishop  of  Rome  as  being- 
New  Rome  and  the  Queen  of  cities.  Some 
indeed  wish  to  understand  the  preposition 
/xei-a  here  of  time  and  not  of  inferiority  of 
grade.  And  they  strive  to  confirm  this  inter- 
pretation by  a  consideration  of  the  XXVIII 
canon  of  Chalcedon,  urging  that  if  Constanti- 
nople is  to  enjoy  equal  honours,  the  preposi- 
tion "  after  "  cannot  signify  subjection.  But 
on  the  other  hand  the  hundred  and  thirtieth 
novel  of  Justinian,1  Book  V  of  the  Imperial 
Constitutions,  title  three,  understands  the 
canon  otherwise.  For,  it  says,  "  we  decree 
that  the  most  holy  Pope  of  Old  Rome,  accord- 
ing to  the  decrees  of  the  holy  synods  is  the 
first  of  all  priests,  and  that  the  most  blessed 
bishop  of  Constantinople  and  of  New  Rome, 
should  have  the  second  place  after  the  Apos- 
tolic Throne  of  the  Elder  Rome,  and  should 
be  superior  in  honour  to  all  others."     From 


this  therefore  it  is  abundantly  evident  that 
"  after  "  denotes  subjection  (i>7ro/?i/?ao7J.6v)  and 
diminution.  And  otherwise  it  would  be  im- 
possible to  guard  this  equality  of  honour  in 
each  see.  For  in  reciting  their  names,  or 
assigning  them  seats  when  they  are  to  sit  to- 
gether, or  arranging  the  order  of  their  signa- 
tures to  documents,  one  must  come  before 
the  other.  Whoever  therefore  shall  explain 
this  particle  fiera  as  only  referring  to  time,  and 
does  not  admit  that  it  signifies  an  inferior 
grade  of  dignity,  does  violence  to  the  passage 
and  draws  from  it  a  meaning  neither  true 
nor  good.  Moreover  in  Canon  xxxvj  of  the 
Council  in  Trullo,  ixera  manifestly  denotes 
subjection,  assigning  to  Constantinople  the 
second  place  after  the  throne  of  Old  Rome  ; 
and  then  adds,  after  this  Alexandria,  then  Anti- 
och, and  last  of  all  shall  be  placed  Jerusalem, 

Hefele. 

If  we  enquire  the  reason  why  this  Council 
tried  to  change  the  order  of  rank  of  the  great 
Sees,  which  had  been  established  in  the  sixth 
Nicene  canon,  we  must  first  take  into  consid- 
eration that,  since  the  elevation  of  Constanti- 
nople to  the  Imperial  residence,  as  New 
Rome,  the  bishops  as  well  as  the  Emperors 
naturally  wished  to  see  the  new  imperial  resi- 
dence, New  Rome,  placed  immediately  after 
Old  Rome  in  ecclesiastical  rank  also  ;  the 
rather,  as  with  the  Greeks  it  was  the  rule  for 
the  ecclesiastical  rank  of  a  See  to  follow  the 
civil  rank  of  the  city.  The  Synod  of  Antioch 
in  341,  in  its  ninth  canon,  had  plainly  declared 
this,  and  subsequently  the  fourth  General 
Council,  in  its  seventeenth  canon,  spoke  in 
the  same  sense.  But  how  these  principles 
were  protested  against  on  the  side  of  Rome, 
we  shall  see  further  on  in  the  history  of  the 
fourth  General  Council.  For  the  present,  it 
may  suffice  to  add  that  the  aversion  to  Alex- 
andria which,  by  favouring  Maximus,  had  ex- 
ercised such  a  disturbing  influence  on  Church 
affairs  in  Constantinople,  may  well  have  helped 
to  effect  the  elevation  of  the  See  of  Constan- 
tinople over  that  of  Alexandria.  Moreover, 
for  many  centuries  Rome  did  not  recognize 
this  change  of  the  old  ecclesiastical  order. 
In  the  sixteenth  session  of  the  fourth  General 


1  The  reader  will  notice  that  this  is  not  even  an  approximately  |  half  later,  after  Leo  I.  had  done  so  much  to  establish  the  power 
contemporaneous  interpretation,  but  more  than  a  century  and  a  |  of  his  see. 


I.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  381 


179 


Council,  the  Papal  Legate,  Lucentius,  express- 
ly declared  this.  In  like  manner  the  Popes 
Leo  the  Great  and  Gregory  the  Great  pro- 
nounced against  it ;  and  though  even  Gratian 
adopted  this  canon  in  his  collection  the  Ro- 
man critics  added  the  following  note  :  Canon 
hie  ex  iis  est,  quos  Apostolica  liomana  Secies  a 
principio  et  longo  post  tempore  non  recepit.  It 
was  only  when,  after  the  conquest  of  Con- 
stantinople by  the  Latins,  a  Latin  patriarchate 
was  founded  there  in  1204,  that  Pope  Inno- 
cent III,  and  the  twelfth  General  Council,  in 
1215,  allowed  this  patriarch  the  first  rank 
after  the  Roman  ;  and  the  same  recognition 
was  expressly  awarded  to  the  Greek  Patriarch 
at  the  Florentine  Union  in  1439. 

T.  W.  Allies.1 

Remarkable  enough  it  is  that  when,  in  the 
Council  of  Chalcedon,  appeal  was  made  to 
this  third  Canon,  the  Pope  St.  Leo  declared 
that  it  had  never  been  notified  to  Rome.  As 
in  the  mean  time  it  had  taken  effect  through- 
out the  whole  East,  as  in  this  very  council 
Nectarius,  as  soon  as  he  is  elected,  presides 
instead  of  Timothy  of  Alexandria,  it  puts  in  a 
strong  point  of  view  the  real  self-government 
of  the  Eastern  Church  at  this  time  ;  for  the 
giving  the  Bishop  of  Constantinople  prece- 
dence over  Alexandria  and  Antioch  was  a  pro- 
ceeding which  affected  the  whole  Church,  and 
so  far  altered  its  original  order — one  in  which 
certainly  the  West  might  claim  to  have  a 
voice.  Tillemont  goes  on :  "  It  would  be  very 
difficult  to  justify  St.  Leo,  if  he  meant  that 
the  Roman  Church  had  never  known  that  the 
Bishop  of  Constantinople  took  the  second 
place  in  the  Church,  and  the  first  in  the  East, 
since  his  legates,  whose  conduct  he  entirely 
approves,  had  just  themselves  authorized  it  as 
a  thing  beyond  dispute,  and  Eusebius  of  Dory- 


j  Iseum  maintained  that  St.  Leo  himself  had  ap- 
proved it. "    The  simple  fact  is,  that,  exceeding- 

1  ly  unwilling  as  the  Bishops  of  Rome  were  to 
sanction  it,  from  this  time,  381,  to  say  the  least, 

I  the  Bishop   of   Constantinople  appears  uni- 

'  formly  as  first  bishop  of  the  East. 

Cardinal  Baronius  in  his  Annals  (a.d.  381, 
n.  35,  36)  has  disputed  the  genuineness  of 
this  Canon  !  As  already  mentioned  it  is  found 
in  the  Corpus  Juris  Canonici,  Decretum,  Pars 
I.,  Dist.  XXII.,  c.  iij.  The  note  added  to 
this  in  Gratian  reads  as  follows  : 

Note  in  Gkatian's  "  Decretum." 

This  canon  is  of  the  number  of  those  which 
the  Apostolic  See  of  Rome  did  not  at  first  nor 
for  long  years  afterwards  receive.  This  is 
evident  from  Epistle  LI.  (or  LIII.)  of  Pope 
Leo  I.  to  Anatolius  of  Constantinople  and 
from  several  other  of  his  letters.  The  same 
thing  also  is  shewn  by  two  letters  of  Leo 
IX. 's,  the  one  against  the  presumptuous  acts 
of  Michael  and  Leo  (cap.  28)  and  the  other 
addressed  to  the  same  Michael.  But  still 
more  clearly  is  this  seen  from  the  letter  of 
Blessed  Gregory  (xxxj.,  lib.  VI.)  to  Eulogius 
of  Alexandria  and  Anastasius  of  Antioch,  and 
[  from  the  letter  of  Nicholas  I.  to  the  Emperor 
,  Michel  which  begins  "  Proposueramus." 
J  However,  the  bishops  of  Constantinople,  sus- 
j  tained  by  the  authority  of  the  Emperors, 
usurped  to  themselves  the  second  place  among 
the  patriarchs,  and  this  at  length  was  granted 
to  them  for  the  sake  of  peace  and  tranquillity, 
as  Pope  Innocent  III.  declares  (in  cap.  antiqiia 
de  privileg.).2 

This  canon  Dionysius  Exiguus  appends  to 
Canon  2,  and  dropping  5,  6,  and  7  he  has  but 
;  three  canons  of  this  Synod. 


CANON  IV. 

Concerning  Maximus  the  Cynic  and  the  disorder  which  has  happened  in  Constanti- 
nople on  his  account,  it  is  decreed  that  Maxinms  never  was  and  is  not  now  a  Bishop  ; 
that  those  who  have  been  ordained  by  him  are  in  no  order  whatever  of  the  clergy  ;  since 
all  which  has  been  done  concerning  him  or  by  him,  is  declared  to  be  invalid. 


NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  IV.  Edmund  Venables. 

Let   Maximus  the  Cynic    be  cast  out  from       (Smith  and  Wace,  Diet  Christ.  Biocj.) 

among   the  bishops,   and  anyone  who  was   in-       Maximus  the  Cynic  ;  the  intrusive  bishop  of 

scribed  by  him  on  the  clergy  list  shall  be  held  as  Constantinople,  a.d.  380.     Ecclesiastical  his- 

profane.  |  tory  hardly  presents   a   more   extraordinary 

1  T.  W.   Allies.     The   Ch.  of  Eng.  cleared  from  the   Charge  I      2  For  some  reason  this  canon  (toes  not  seem  to  be  any  more  ac- 
of  Schism.    (Written  while  an  Anglican)  p.  94  (,2d  Edition).  j  ceptable  to  modern  champions  of  the  Papacy  than  it  was  to  the 

N  2 


ISO 


I.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  381 


career  than  that  of  this  man,  who,  after  a 
most  disreputable  youth,  more  than  once 
brought  to  justice  for  his  misdeeds,  and  bear- 
ing the  scars  of  his  punishments,  by  sheer 
impudence,  clever  flattery,  and  adroit  manage- 
ment of  opportunities,  contrived  to  gain  the 
confidence  successively  of  no  less  men  than 
Peter  of  Alexandria,  Gregory  Nazianzen,  and 
Ambrose,  and  to  install  himself  in  one  of  the 
first  sees  of  the  church,  from  which  he  was 
with  difficulty  dislodged  by  a  decree  of  an 
ecumenical  council.  His  history  also  illus- 
trates the  jealousy  felt  by  the  churches  of 
Alexandria  and  Rome  towards  their  young 
and  vigorous  rival  for  patriarchal  honours,  the 
church  of  Constantinople  ;  as  well  as  their 
claim  to  interfere  with  her  government,  and 
to  impose  prelates  upon  her  according  to  their 
pleasure.  Alexandria,  as  the  chief  see  of  the 
Eastern  world,  from  the  first  asserted  a  juris- 
diction which  she  has  never  formally  relin- 
quished over  the  see  of  Constantinople,  more 
particularly  in  a  vacancy  in  the  episcopate 
(Neale,  Patr.  of  Alexandria,  i.,  206).  The  con- 
duct of  Peter,  the  successor  of  Athanasius,  first 
in  instituting  Gregory  Nazianzen  bishop  of 
Constantinople  by  his  letters  and  sending  a 
formal  recognition  of  his  appointment  and 
then  in  substituting  Maximus,  as  has  been 
remarked  by  Milman  (History  of  Christianity, 
hi.,  115,  note)  and  Ullman  (Greg.  Naz.,  p.  203 
[Cox's  translation] ),  furnish  unmistakable 
indications  of  the  desire  to  erect  an  Oriental 
papacy, by  establishing  the  primacy  of  Alexan- 
dria over  Constantinople  and  so  over  the  East, 
which  was  still  further  illustrated  a  few  years 
later  by  the  high-handed  behaviour  of  The- 
ophilus  towards  Chrysostom. 

Maximus  was  a  native  of  Alexandria  of  low 
parentage.  He  boasted  that  his  family  had 
produced  martyrs.  He  got  instructed  in  the 
rudiments  of  the  Christian  faith  and  received 
baptism,  but  strangely  enough  sought  to  com- 
bine the  Christian  profession  with  Cynic  phi- 
losophy. 

When  he  presented  himself  at  the  Eastern 
capital  he  wore  the  white  robe  of  a  Cynic,  and 
carried  a  philosopher's  staff,  his  head  being- 
laden  with  a  huge  crop  of  crisp  curling  hair, 
dyed  a  golden  yellow,  and  swinging  over  his 
shoulders  in  long  ringlets.  He  represented 
himself  as  a  confessor  for  the  Nicene  faith, 
and  his  banishment  to  the  Oasis  as  a  suffering 
for  the  truth  (Orat.  xxiii.,  p.  419).  Before 
long  he  completely  gained  the  ear  and  heart 
of  Gregory,  who  admitted  him  to  the  closest 


companionship.  Maximus  proclaimed  the 
most  unbounded  admiration  for  Gregory's 
discourses,  which  he  praised  in  private,  and, 
according  to  the  custom  of  the  age,  applauded 
in  public.  His  zeal  against  heretics  was  most 
fierce,  and  his  denunciation  of  them  uncom- 
promising. The  simple-hearted  Gregory  be- 
came the  complete  dupe  of  Maximus. 

All  this  time  Maximus  was  secretly  matur- 
ing a  plot  for  ousting  his  unsuspicious  patron 
from  his  throne.  He  gained  the  ear  and  the 
confidence  of  Peter  of  Alexandria,  and  induced 
him  to  favour  his  ambitious  views.  Greg- 
ory, he  asserted,  had  never  been  formally  en- 
throned bishop  of  Constantinople  ;  his  trans- 
lation thither  was  a  violation  of  the  canons  of 
the  church  ;  rustic  in  manners,  he  had  proved 
himself  quite  unfitted  for  the  place.  Con- 
stantinople Avas  getting  weary  of  him.  It  was 
time  the  patriarch  of  the  Eastern  world  should 
exercise  his  prerogative  and  give  New  Rome 
a  more  suitable  bishop.  The  old  man  was 
imposed  on  as  Gregory  had  been,  and  lent 
himself  to  Maximus's  projects.  Maximus 
found  a  ready  tool  in  a  presbyter  of  Constan- 
tinople, envious  of  Gregory's  talents  and  popu- 
larity (de  Tit.,  p.  13).  Others  were  gained  by 
bribes.  Seven  unscrupulous  sailor  fellows 
were  despatched  from  Alexandria  to  mix  with 
the  people,  and  watch  for  a  favourable  oppor- 
tunity for  carrying  out  the  plot.  When  all 
was  ripe  they  were  followed  by  a  bevy  of 
bishops,  with  secret  instructions  from  the  pa- 
triarch to  consecrate  Maximus. 

The  conspirators  chose  the  night  for  the 
accomplishment  of  their  enterprise.  Gregory 
they  knew  was  confined  by  illness.  They 
forced  their  way  into  the  cathedral,  and  com- 
menced the  rite  of  ordination.  By  the  time 
they  had  set  the  Cynic  on  the  archiepiscojml 
throne,  and  had  just  begun  shearing  away  his 
long  curls,  they  were  surprised  by  the  dawn. 
The  news  quickly  spread,  and  everybody 
rushed  to  the  church.  The  magistrates  ap- 
peared on  the  scene  with  their  officers  ;  Maxi- 
mus and  his  consecrators  were  driven  from 
the  sacred  precincts,  and  in  the  house  or  shop 
of  a  flute-player  the  tonsure  was  completed. 
Maximus  repaired  to  Thessalonica  to  lay  his 
cause  before  Theodosius.  He  met  with  a 
cold  reception  from  the  emperor,  who  com- 
mitted the  matter  to  Ascholius,  the  much  re- 
spected bishop  of  that  city,  charging  him  to 
refer  it  to  pope  Damasus.  We  have  two 
letters  of  Damasus's  on  this  subject.  In  the 
first,  addressed  to  Ascholius  and  the  Mace- 


Chnrch  of  Rome  fifteen  hnndred  years  ago.  I  give  as  a  sample  1  nople  was  the  germ  of  the  successful  mendacity  of  the  arch-rebel 
of  this  the  following  from  n  recent  Roman  Catholic  writer  :  "  The  Photius."  (Rivfngton.  The  Prim.  Ch„  p.  263).  The  phraseology 
decree  which  goes  by  the  name  of  the  Third  Canon  of  Constanti-  |  seems  to  suggest  warm  discontent  at  the  canon. 


T.  CONSTANTINOPLE.    A.D.  381 


181 


donian  bishops,  lie  vehemently  condemns  the 
"  ardor  animi  et  fceda  presumptio "  which 
had  led  certain  persons  coming  from  Egypt, 
in  violation  of  the  rule  of  ecclesiastical  disci- 
pline, to  have  proposed  to  consecrate  a  rest- 
less man,  an  alien  from  the  Christian  profes- 
sion, not  worthy  to  be  called  a  Christian,  who 
wore  an  idolatrous  garb  ("  habitus  idoli ") 
and  the  long  hair  which  St.  Paul  said  Avas  a 
shame  to  a  man,  and  remarks  on  the  fact  that 
being  expelled  from  the  church  they  were 
compelled  to  complete  the  ordination  "intra 
parietes  alienos."  In  the  second  letter,  ad- 
dressed to  Ascholius  individually  [Ep.  vi.)  he 
repeats  his  condemnation  of  the  ordination  of 
the  long-haired  Maximus  ("comatum")  and 
asks  him  to  take  special  care  that  a  Catholic 
bishop  maybe  ordained  (Migne,  Patrolog.,  xiii., 
pp.  366-369  ;  Ep.  5  ;  5,  6). 

Maximus  returned  to  Alexandria,  and  de- 
manded that  Peter  should  assist  him  in  re- 
establishing himself  at  Constantinople.  But 
Peter  had  discovered  the  man's  true  character, 
and  received  him  as  coldly  as  Theodosius  had 
done.  Determined  to  carry  his  point  he  pre- 
sented himself  to  the  patriarch  at  the  head  of 
a  disorderly  mob,  with  the  threat  that  if  he 
did  not  help  him  to  gain  the  throne  of  Con- 
stantinople he  would  have  that  of  Alexandria. 
Peter  appealed  to  the  prefect,  by  whom  Maxi 
mus  was  driven  out  of  E; 
Peter  and  the 


,sypt.     The  death  of 
accession   of   Timotheus 


are 


placed  Feb.  14,  380.  The  events  described 
must  therefore  have  occurred  in  379.  When 
the  second  ecumenical  council  met  at  Con- 
stantinople in  381,  the  question  of  Maximus's 
claim  to  the  see  of  Constantinople  came  up 
for  consideration.  His  pretensions  were 
unanimously  rejected. 

Bright. 
(Notes  on  the  Canons,  in  loc.) 
Maximus,  however,  having  been  expelled 
from  Egypt,  made  his  way  into  Northern 
Italy,  presented  to  Gratian  at  Milan  a  large 
work  which  he  had  written  against  the  Arians 
(as  to  which  Gregory  sarcastically  remarks — 
"  Saul  a  prophet,  Maximus  an  author  ! "  Carm, 
adv.  Max.,  21),  and  deceived  St.  Ambrose  and 
his  suffragans  by  showing  the  record  of  his 
consecration,  with  letters  which  Peter  had 
once  written  in  his  behalf.  To  these  prelates 
of  the  "Italic  diocese  "  the  appeal  of  Maximus 
seemed  like  the  appeal  of  Athanasius,  and 
more  recently  of  Peter  himself,  to  the  sym- 
pathy of  the  church  of  Borne  ;  and  they  re- 
quested Theodosius  to  let  the  case  be  heard 
before  a  really  General  Council  (Mansi,  iii., 
631).  Nothing  further  came  of  it ;  perhaps, 
says  Tillemont,  those  who  thus  wrote  in  favour 
of  Maximus  "  reconnurent  bientot  quel  il 
etait "  (ix.,  502) :  so  that  when  a  Council  did 
meet  at  Rome  towards  the  end  of  382,  no 
steps  were  taken  in  his  behalf. 


CANON  V. 

(Probably  adopted  at  a  Council  held  in  Constantinople  the  next  year,  382. 
duction  on  the  number  of  the  Canons.) 


Vide.  Intro- 


In  regard  to  the  tome  of  the  Western  [Bishops],  we  receive  those  in  Antioch  also 
who  confess  the  unity  of  the  Godhead  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy 
Ghost. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  V. 

The  Tome  of  the  Westerns  which  recognizes 
the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  as  con- 
substantial  is  highly  acceptable. 

Beveridge  and  Van  Espen  translate  this 
canon  differently,  thus,  "With  regard  to  the 
tome  of  the  Westerns,  we  agree  with  those  in 
Antioch  [i.e.  the  Synod  of  378]  who  (accept- 
ed it  and)  acknowledged  the  unity  of  the 
Godhead  of  the  Father  etc."  In  opposition 
to  this  translation  Hefele  urges  that  diroSixea-- 
9ai  in  ecclesiastical  language  usually  refers  to 
receiving  persons  and  recognizing  them,  not 
opinions  or  doctrines. 


Hefele. 

This  canon  probably  does  not  belong  to 
the  second  General  Council,  but  to  the  Synod 
held  in  the  following  year  at  Constantinople 
consisting  of  nearly  the  same  bishops. 

It  is  certain  that  by  the  "Tome  of  the 
Westerns  "  a  dogmatic  work  of  the  Western 
bishops  is  to  be  understood,  and  the  only 
question  is  which  Tome  of  the  Westerns  is 
here  meant.  Several — for  instance,  the  Greek 
commentators,  Balsamon  and  Zonaras,  and 
the  spokesman  of  the  Latins  at  the  Synod  of 
Florence  in  1439  (Archbishop  Andrew  of 
Rhodes) — understood  by  it  the  decrees  of  the 
Synod  of  Sardica ;  but  it  seems  to  me  that 


182 


I.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  381 


this  canon  undoubtedly  indicates  that  the 
Tome  of  the  Westerns  also  mentioned  the  con- 
dition of  the  Antiochian  Church,  and  the  di- 
vision into  two  parties  of  the  orthodox  of  that 
place — the  Meletian  schism.  Now,  as  this 
was  not  mentioned,  nay,  could  not  have  been, 
at  the  Synod  of  Sardica — for  this  schism  at 
Antioch  only  broke  out  seventeen  years  later 
— some  other  document  of  the  Latins  must 
certainly  be  meant.  But  we  know  that  Pope 
Damasus,  and  the  synod  assembled  by  him  in 
360,  addressed  a  Tome  to  the  Orientals,  of 
which  fragments  are  still  preserved,  and  that 
nine  years  later,  in  379,  a  great  synod  at 
Antioch  of  one  hundred  and  forty-six 
orthodox  Oriental  bishops,  under  Meletius, 
accepted  and  signed  this  Tome,  and  at  the 
same  time  sought  to  put  a  stop  to  the  Mele- 
tian schism.  Soon  afterwards,  in  380,  Pope 
Damasus  and  his  fourth  Roman  Synod  again 
sent  a  treatise  on  the  faith,  of  which  we  still 
possess  a  portion,  containing  anathemas,  to 
the  Orientals,  especially  to  Bishop  Paul  of 
Antioch,  head  of  the  Eustathians  of  that  city. 
Under  these  circumstances,  we  are  justified  in 
referring  the  expression  "  the  tome  of  the 
Westerns "  either  to  the  Roman  treatise  of 
369  or  to  that  of  380,  and  I  am  disposed  to 
give  the  preference  to  the  former,  for  the 
following  reasons : — 

(1.)  As  has  been  already  observed,  this 
canon  belongs  to  the  Synod  held  at  Constan- 
tinople in  382. 

(2.)  We  still  possess  in  Theodoret  a  Syno- 
dal Letter  to  the  Latins  from  this  later 
Synod. 

(3.)  The  canon  in  question,  as  proceeding 
from  the  same  source,  is,  of  course  to  a  certain 
extent,  connected  with  this  letter. 

(4.)  In  this  Synodal  Letter,  the  Eastern 
bishops,  in  order  to  convince  the  Latins  of 
their  orthodoxy,  appeal  to  two  documents, 
the  one  a  "tome "of  an  Antiochian  Synod, 
and  the  other  a  "tome"  of  the  Ecumenical 
Council  held  at  Constantinople  in  381. 

(5.)  By  the  Antiochian  Synod  here  men- 
tioned, I  understand  the  great  synod  of  378, 
and,  as  a  necessary  consequence,  believe  the 
"  tome  "  there  produced  to  be  none  other  than 
the  Roman  Tome  of  369,  which  was  then  ac- 
cepted at  Antioch. 

(6.)  It  is  quite  certain  that  the  Synod  of 
Antioch  sent  a  copy  of  this  Tome,  with  the 
declaration  of  its  acceptance  and  the  signa- 


tures of  the  members,  back  to  Rome,  as  a 
supplement  to  its  Synodal  Letter  ;  and  hence 
Lucas  Holstenius  was  still  able  to  find  frag- 
ments of  it  in  Rome. 

(7.)  The  Synod  of  Constantinople  of  382 
might  well  call  this  Tome,  sent  back  to  Rome 
with  the  acceptance  and  signatures  of  the 
Easterns,  a  "  Tome  established  at  Antioch," 
although  it  was  really  drawn  up  at  Rome. 

(8.)  If,  however,  the  Synod  of  Constanti- 
nople in  its  Synodal  Letter  speaks  of  this 
Tome,  we  are  justified  in  supposing  that  the 
one  mentioned  in  its  canon  is  the  same. 

(9.)  That  which  still  remains  of  the  Roman 
Tome  of  369,  treats  expressly  of  the  oneness 
of  the  Godhead  of  the  Father,  the  Son,  and 
the  Holy  Ghost  ;  and  such  were  the  contents 
of  the  Tome  according  to  this  canon. 

(10.)  It  is  true  that  the  fragments  still  pre- 
served of  this  Tome  contain  no  passage  di- 
rectly referring  to  the  Antiochian  schism  ; 
but,  in  the  first  place,  very  little  remains  of 
it,  and  there  is  the  more  reason  to  suppose 
that  the  Meletian  schism  was  spoken  of  in 
the  portion  which  has  been  lost,  as  it  was  the 
same  Antiochian  Synod  that  accepted  the 
Tome  which  urged  the  putting  an  end  to  that 
schism.  It  is  still  more  to  the  purpose  that 
the  Italian  bishops,  in  their  letter  to  the 
Easterns  in  381,  expressly  say  that  they  had 
alreadj'  long  before  (dudum)  written  to  the 
Orientals  in  order  to  put  an  end  to  the  divis- 
ion between  the  orthodox  at  Antioch.  By  this 
"dudum"  I  conclude  that  they  refer  to  the 
Roman  Tome  of  369  ;  and  if  the  Westerns  in 
their  letter  to  the  Easterns  in  381  pointed  to 
this  Tome,  it  was  natural  that  the  Synod  of 
Constantinople  of  382  should  also  have  re- 
ferred to  it,  for  it  was  that  very  letter  of  the 
Latins  Avhich  occasioned  and  called  the  synod 
into  being. 

Lastly,  for  the  full  understanding  of  this 
1  canon,  it  is  necessary  to  observe  that  the 
Latins,  in  their  letter  just  mentioned  of  381, 
say  that  "they  had  already  in  their  earlier 
:  missive  (i.e.  as  we  suppose,  in  the  Tome  of 
369)  spoken  to  the  effect  that  both  parties  at 
Antioch,  one  as  much  as  the  other,  were  or- 
thodox." Agreeing  with  this  remark  of  the 
Westerns,  repeated  in  their  letter  of  381,  the 
Easterns  in  this  canon  say,  "  We  also  recog- 
nise all  Antiochians  as  orthodox  who  acknowl- 
edge the  oneness  of  the  Godhead  of  the 
Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost." 


1.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.f).  38i 


183 


CANON  VI. 

(Probably  adopted  at  a  Council  held  in  Constantinople  the  next  year,  382. 
Introduction  on  the  number  of  Canons.) 


Vide 


Forasmuch  as  many  Avishing  to  confuse  and  overturn  ecclesiastical  order,  do  con- 
tentiously  and  slanderously  fabricate  charges  against  the  orthodox  bishops  who  have 
the  administration  of  the  Churches,  intending  nothing  else  than  to  stain  the  reputation 
of  the  priests  and  raise  up  disturbances  amongst  the  peaceful  laity ;  therefore  it  seemed 
right  to  the  Holy  Synod  of  Bishops  assembled  together  in  Constantinople,  not  to  admit 
accusers  Avithout  examination  ;  and  neither  to  allow  all  persons  whatsoever  to  bring 
accusations  against  the  rulers  of  the  Church,  nor,  on  the  other  hand,  to  exclude  all.  If 
then,  any  one  shall  bring  a  private  complaint  against  the  Bishop,  that  is,  one  relating 
to  his  own  affairs,  as,  for  example,  that  he  has  been  defrauded,  or  otherwise  unjustly 
treated  by  him,  in  such  accusations  no  examination  shall  be  made,  either  of  the  person 
or  of  the  religion  of  the  accuser ;  for  it  is  by  all  means  necessary  that  the  conscience  of 
the  Bishop  should  be  free,  and  that  he  who  says  he  has  been  wronged  should  meet 
with  righteous  judgment,  of  whatever  religion  he  may  be.  But  if  the  charge  alleged 
against  the  Bishop  be  that  of  some  ecclesiastical  offence,  then  it  is  necessary  to  examine 
carefully  the  persons  of  the  accusers,  so  that,  in  the  first  place,  heretics  may  not  be 
suffered  to  bring  accusations  touching  ecclesiastical  matters  against  orthodox  bishops. 
And  by  heretics  we  mean  both  those  who  were  aforetime  cast  out  and  those  whom  Ave 
ourselves  have  since  anathematized,  and  also  those  professing  to  hold  the  true  faith  Avho 
have  separated  from  our  canonical  bishops,  and  set  up  conventicles  in  opposition  [to 
them].  Moreover,  if  there  be  any  Avho  have  been  condemned  for  faults  and  cast  out 
of  the  Church,  or  excommunicated,  Avhether  of  the  clergy  or  the  laity,  neither  shall  it  be 
laAvful  for  these  to  bring  an  accusation  against  the  bishop,  until  they  have  cleared  aAvay 
the  charge  against  themselves.  In  like  manner,  persons  Avho  are  under  previous  accu- 
sations are  not  to  be  permitted  to  bring  charges  against  a  bishop  or  any  other  clergy- 
man, until  they  shall  have  proved  their  oavii  innocence  of  the  accusation  brought  against 
them.  But  if  any,  being  neither  heretics,  nor  excommunicate,  nor  condemned,  nor 
under  previous  accusation  for  alleged  faults,  should  declare  that  they  have  any  ecclesi- 
astical charge  against  the  bishop,  the  Holy  Synod  bids  them  first  lay  their  charges 
before  all  the  Bishops  of  the  Province,  and  before  them  prove  the  accusations,  Avhatso- 
ever  they  may  be,  Avhich  they  have  brought  against  the  bishop.  And  if  the  compro- 
vincials  should  be  unable  rightly  to  settle  the  charges  brought  against  the  bishop,  then 
the  parties  must  betake  themselves  to  a  greater  synod  of  the  bishops  of  that  diocese 
called  together  for  this  purpose ;  and  they  shall  not  produce  their  allegations  before 
they  have  promised  in  writing  to  undergo  an  equal  penalty  to  be  exacted  from  them- 
selves, if,  in  the  course  of  the  examination,  they  shall  be  proved  to  have  slandered  the 
accused  bishop.  And  if  anyone,  despising  Avhat  has  been  decreed  concerning  these 
things,  shall  presume  to  annoy  the  ears  of  the  Emperor,  or  the  courts  of  temporal 
judges,  or,  to  the  dishonour  of  all  the  Bishops  of  his  Province,  shall  trouble  an  Ecu- 
menical Synod,  such  an  one  shall  by  no  means  be  admitted  as  an  accuser ;  forasmuch 
as  he  has  cast  contempt  upon  the  Canons,  and  brought  reproach  upon  the  order  of  the 
Church. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  or  Canon  VI. 
Even  one  that  is  of  ill  repute,  if  he  have  suf- 
fered any  injury,  let  him  bring  a  charge  against 
the  bishop.  If  however  it  be  a  crime  of  eccle- 
siastical matters  let  him  not  speak.  Nor  shall 
another  condemned  before,  spieale.  Let  not  one 
excommunicated,  or  cast  forth,  or  charged  with 
any  crimes  speak,  until  he  is  cleared  of  them.  But 


those  ivho  should  bring  the  charge  are  the  ortho- 
dox, who  are  communicants,  uncondcmned,  un- 
accused. Let  the  case  be  heard  by  the  provin- 
cials. If  hoivever  they  are  not  able  to  decide 
the  case,  let  them  have  recourse  to  a  greater 
synod  and  let  them  not  be  heard,  ivithout  a  writ- 
ten declaration  of  liability  to  the  same  suffer- 
ings [i.e.  of  their  readiness  to  be  tried  by  the  lex 


184 


1  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  381 


taliouis.]  But  should  anyone  contrary  to  the 
provisions  appeal  to  the  Emperor  and  trouble 
him,  let  such  be  cast  forth. 

The  phrase  "  who  have  the  administration 
of  the  Churches,"  Hatch  in  his  Bampton 
Lectures  (Lect.  I.,  p.  41)  erroneously  sup- 
poses to  refer  only  to  the  administration  of 
the  Church's  alms.  But  this,  as  Dr.  Bright 
well  points  out  ("  Notes  on  the  Canons,"  in 
loc.)  cannot  be  the  meaning  of  olKovafjalv  when 
used  absolutely  as  in  this  canon.  He  says, 
"  When  a  merely  '  economic '  function  is 
intended,  the  context  shews  it,  as  in  Chalce- 
don,  Canon  xxvj."  He  also  points  out  that  in 
Canon  ij.,  and  in  Eusebins  (H.  E.  iv.,  4),  and 
when  St.  Basil  wishes  his  brother  to  oikovojiuv 
a  church  suited  to  his  temperament  (Epist. 
xcviij.,  2)  the  meaning  of  the  word  is  evi- 
dently spiritual  stewardship. 

ZONAKAS. 

By  "those  who  were  cast  out  of  the 
Church "  are  to  be  understood  those  who 
were  altogether  cut  off  from  the  Church ;  but 
by  those  who  were  "  excommunicated  "  the 
holy  fathers  intend  all  those,  whether  clerics 
or  laymen,  who  are  deprived  of  communion 
for  a  set  time. 

Van  Espen. 

It  is  evident  from  the  context  of  this  canon 
that  "  Diocese  "  here  does  not  signify  the  dis- 
trict or  territory  assigned  to  any  one  bishop, 
as  we  to-day  use  the  word  ;  but  for  a  district, 
which  not  only  contained  many  episcopal  dis- 
tricts, as  to-day  do  ecclesiastical  provinces, 
but  which  contained  also  many  provinces,  and 
this  was  the  meaning  of  the  word  at  the  time 
of  this  Council's  session. 

Zonaras. 
We  call  Adrianople,  for  example,  or  Philorj- 
opolis  with  the  bishops  of  each  a  "Province," 
but  the  whole  of  Thrace  or  Macedonia  we 
call  a  "  Diocese."  When  these  crimes  were 
brought  forward  to  be  corrected,  for  the  judg- 


ing of  which  the  provincial  bishops  were  by  no 
means  sufficient,  then  the  Canon  orders  the 
bishops  of  the  diocese  to  assemble,  and 
determine  the  charges  preferred  against  the 
bishop. 

Van  Espen. 

Both  the  Canon  and  the  Civil  Law  require 
the  accusers  to  submit  themselves  to  the  law 
of  retaliation  (lex  tal/onis).    Vide  Gratian,  Pt. 

j  II.,  Causa  II.,  Qiuest.  III.,  2  and  3,  where  we 
read  from  the  decree  of  Pope  Hadrian  ;  "  Who- 
ever shall  not  prove  what  he  advances,  shall 

;  himself  suffer  the  penalty  due  the  crime  he 

|  charged."  And  under  the  name  of  Damasus, 
"The  calumniator,  if  he  fail  in  proving  his 
accusation,  shall  receive  his  tale."  The  Civil 
Law  is  in  L.  x.,  Cod.  de  Calunvniatoribus,  and 
reads,  "  Whoso  charges  a  crime,  shall  not  have 
licence  to  lie  with  impunity,  since  justice  re- 
quires that  calumniators  shall  endure  the  pun- 
ishment due  the  crime  which  they  failed  to 
prove." 

The  Council  wishes  that  all  accusations  of 
bishops  for  ecclesiastical  offences  shall  be  kept 
out  of  the  secular  courts,  and  shall  be  heard 

.  by  synods  of  bishops,  in  the  manner  and  form 
here  prescribed,  which  is  in  accordance  with 
the  Constitution  which  under  the  names  of 

'  Valens,  Gratian,  and  Valentinian,  the  Emper- 

;  ors,  is  referred  to  in  law  xxiij.  of  the  Code  of 
Theodosius,  De  Episcop>is  el  C/ericis. 

Whatever  may  be  said  of  the  meeting  of 
bishops  at  which  this  canon  was  enacted,  this 
is  clear,  no  mention  was  made  of  the  Boman 
Pontiff,  nor  of  the  Council  of  Sardica,  as  Fleury 
notes  in  his  Hisfoire  Ecclesiastique,  Lib.  xviij., 

1  n.  8.  From  this  it  is  evident  either  that  at  that 
time  the  Orientals  did  not  admit,  especially 
for  bishops,  appeals  to  the  Boman  Pontiff ;  nor 

!  did  they  accept  the  authority  of  the  Synod  of 
Sardica,  in  so  far  as  it  permitted  that  the  sen- 
tence given  in  a  provincial  synod,  should  be 
reopened  by  the  neighbouring  bishops  to- 
gether with  the  bishops  of  the  province,  and 
if  it  seemed  good,  that  the  cause  might  be  re- 
ferred to  Borne. 


WARNING  TO  THE  READER  TOUCHING  CANON  VII. 

(Beveridge,  Synodicon,  Tom.  II.,  in  loc.) 

This  canon,  I  confess,  is  contained  in  all  the  editions  of  the  Commentaries  of  Balsamon 
and  Zonaras.  It  is  cited  also  by  Photius  in  Nomocanon,  Tit.  xii.,  ch.  xiv.,  besides  it  is  extant 
in  a  contracted  form  in  the  Epitome  of  Alexius  Aristenus.  But  it  is  wanting  in  all  the  Latin 
versions  of  the  Canons,  in  the  ancient  translations  of  Dionys.  Exig.,  Isidore  Mercator,  etc.  ; 
also  in  the  Epitome  of  Sym.  Logothet.,  and  the  Arabic  paraphrase  of  Josephus  iEgyp.,  and 
what  is  particularly  to  be  observed,  in  the  collection  and  nomocanon  of  John  of  Antioch  ;  and 


I.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  381  185 

this  not  through  want  of  attention  on  his  part,  as  is  clear  from  this  namely,  that  in  the  order 
of  the  Canons  as  given  by  him  he  attributes  six  Canons  only  to  this  second  General  Council, 
saying  " .  .  .  of  the  Fathers  who  assembled  at  Constantinople,  by  whom  six  Canons 
were  set  forth,"  so  that  it  is  clear  the  present  was  not  reckoned  among  the  canons  of  this 
council  in  those  days.  Nay,  the  whole  conrposition  of  this  canon  clearly  indicates  that  it  is 
to  be  ascribed,  neither  to  this  present  council,  nor  to  any  other  (unless  perhaps  to  that  of 
Trullo,  of  which  we  shall  speak  afterwards).  For  nothing  is  appointed  in  it,  nothing  con- 
firmed, but  a  certain  ancient  custom  of  receiving  converted  heretics,  is  here  merely  recited. 

(Hefele,  History  of  the  Councils,  Vol.  II.,  p.  368.) 
As  we  possess  a  letter  from  the  Church  at  Constantinople  in  the  middle  of  the  fifth  cen- 
tury to  Bishop  Martyrius  of  Antioch,  in  which  the  same  subject  is  referred  to  in  a  precisely 
similar  way,  Beveridge  is  probably  right  in  conjecturing  that  the  canon  was  only  an  extract 
from  this  letter  to  Martyrius ;  therefore  in  no  way  a  decree  of  the  second  General  Council, 
nor  even  of  the  Synod  of  382,  but  at  least  eighty  years  later  than  the  latter.  This  canon, 
with  an  addition,  was  afterwards  adopted  by  the  Quinisext  Synod  as  its  ninety -fifth,  without, 
however,  giving  its  origin. 

CANON  VII. 

Those  who  from  heresy  turn  to  orthodoxy,  and  to  the  portion  of  those  who  are  being 
saved,  we  receive  according  to  the  following  method  and  custom :  Arians,  and  Mace- 
donians, and  Sabbatians,  and  Novatians,  who  call  themselves  Cathari  or  Aristeri,  and 
Quarto-decimans  or  Tetradites,  and  Apollinarians,  we  receive,  upon  their  giving  a  writ- 
ten renunciation  [of  their  errors]  and  anathematize  every  heresy  which  is  not  in  accord- 
ance with  the  Holy,  Catholic,  and  Apostolic  Church  of  God.  Thereupon,  they  are  first 
sealed  or  anointed  with  the  holy  oil  upon  the  forehead,  eyes,  nostrils,  mouth,  and  ears  ; 
and  when  we  seal  them,  we  say,  "  The  Seal  of  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  But  Euno- 
mians,  who  are  baptized  with  only  one  immersion,  and  Montanists,  who  are  here  called 
Phrygians,  and  Sabellians,  who  teach  the  identity  of  Father  and  Son,  and  do  sundry 
other  mischievous  things,  and  [the  partisans  of]  all  other  heresies — for  there  are  many 
such  here,  particularly  among  those  Avho  come  from  the  country  of  the  Galatians  : — all 
these,  Avhen  they  desire  to  turn  to  orthodoxy,  Ave  receive  as  heathen.  On  the  first  clay 
Ave  make  them  Christians;  on  the  second,  catechumens;  on  the  third,  Ave  exorcise  them 
by  breathing  thrice  in  their  face  and  ears  ;  and  thus  Ave  instruct  them  and  oblige  them  to 
spend  some  time  in  the  Church,  and  to  hear  the  Scriptures ;  and  then  Ave  baptize  them. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VII.1 


Quarto-decimans  or  Tetradites,  Arians,  Mace- 
donians, Sabbatians,  and  Apollinarians  ought  to 
be  received  loith  their  books  and  anointed  in  cdl 
their  organs  of  sense. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VIII. 


ing  with  chrism  of  the  eyes,  the  nostrils,  the 
ears,  the  mouth,  and  the  broAv  ;  and  signing 
them  with  the  words,  "  The  Seal  of  the  gift  of 
the  Holy  Ghost." 

For  the  "Cathari,"  see  Notes  on  Canon  viij. 
of  I.  Nice. 

Hammond. 

Sabbatians.      Sabbatius    Avas   a  presbyter 


Eunomians  baptized  uith  one  immersion,  Sa- ,  who  adopted  the  sentiments  of  Novatius,  but 

as  it  is  clear  from  the  histories  of  Socrates 
and  Sozomen,  that  he  did  not  do  so  till  at 
least  eight  years  after  the  celebration  of  this 
council,  it  is  of  course  equally  clear  that  this 
canon  could  not  have  been  framed  by  this 
council. 


bellians,  and   Phrygians  are   to   be   received  as 
heathen. 

Aristemus  (in-  Can.  vij.). 

Those  giA-ing  up  their  books  and  execrat- 
ing every  heresy  are  received  Avith  only  anoint- 


1  This  canon  is  broken  into  two  by  the  Ancient  Epitome. 


186  I.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A..D.  381 

Aristeri.  This  is  probably  a  false  reading ,  others  Tertullian,  but  being  condemned  by 
for  Aristi,  i.e.  the  best.  In  the  letter  above  j  the  Church,  his  followers  formed  a  sect  re- 
mentioned  the  expression  is  Cathari  and  Ca- ;  markable  for  extreme  austerity.  But  al- 
theroteri,  i.e.  the  pure,  and  the  more  pure.       I  though  they  asserted  that  the  Holy  Ghost 

The  Quarto-decimans,  or  Tetradites,  were  ;  had  inspired  Montanus  to  introduce  a  system 
those  persons  who  persisted  in  observing  the  ;  of  greater  perfection  than  the  Church  had  be- 
Easter  festival  with  the  Jews,  on  the  four- .  fore  known,  and  condemned  those  who  would 
teenth  day  of  the  first  month,  whatever  day ;  not  join  them  as  carnal,  they  did  not  at  first 
of  the  week  it  happened  to  be.  innovate  in  any  of  the  articles  of  the  Creed. 

Montanists.  One  of  the  older  sects,  so  |  This  sect  lasted  a  long  time,  and  spread  much 
called  from  Montanus,  who  embraced  Chris-  in  Phrygia  and  the  neighbouring  districts, 
tianity  in  the  second  century.  He  professed  j  whence  they  were  called  Phryges  and  Cata- 
to  be  inspired  in  a  peculiar  way  by  the  Holy  :  phryges,  and  latterly  adopted  the  errors  of 
Ghost,  and  to  prophesy.  He  was  supported  !  Sabellius  respecting  the  Trinity, 
in  his  errors  by  two  women,  Priscilla  and 

Maximilla,  who  also  pretended  to  prophesy.       The  other  heresies  mentioned  in  this  canon 
His  heresy  infected  many  persons,  amongst  have  been  treated  of  in  the  excursus  to  Canon  j. 

EXCURSUS  ON  THE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  SECOND  ECUMENICAL  COUNCIL. 

(Hefele,  History  of  the  Councils,  Vol.  II,  pp.  370,  ct  seqq.) 

Lastly,  to  turn  to  the  question  of  the  authority  of  this  Council,  it  appears,  first  of  all, 
that  immediately  after  its  close,  in  the  same  year,  381,  several  of  its  acts  were  censured  by  a 
Council  of  Latins,  namely,  the  prolongation  of  the  Meletian  schism  (by  the  elevation  of 
Flavian),  and  the  choice  of  Nectarius  as  Bishop  of  Constantinople,  while,  as  is  known,  the 
Westerns  held  (the  Cynic)  Maximus  to  be  the  rightful  bishop  of  that  city. 

In  consequence  of  this,  the  new  Synod  assembled  in  the  following  year,  382,  at  Con- 
stantinople, sent  the  Latins  a  copy  of  the  decrees  of  faith  composed  the  year  before,  expressly 
calling  this  Synod  oIkov/jlcviktj  and  at  the  same  time  seeking  to  justify  it  in  those  points  which 
had  been  censured.  Photius  ]  maintains  that  soon  afterwards  Pope  Dainasus  confirmed  this 
synod  ;  but,  as  the  following  will  show,  this  confirmation  could  only  have  referred  to  the  creed 
and  not  to  the  canons.  As  late  as  about  the  middle  of  the  fifth  century,  Poise  Leo  I.  spoke 
in  a  very  depreciatory  manner  of  these  canons,  especially  of  the  third,  which  concerned  the 
ecclesiastical  rank  of  Constantinople,  remarking  that  it  was  never  sent  to  the  See  of  Rome. 
Still  later,  Gregory  the  Great  wrote  in  the  same  sense  :  Homana  autem  Ecclesia  eosdam 
canones  vel  gesta  Synodi  illius  hactenus  non  habet,  nee  accepit ;  in  hoc  autem  cam  accepit,  quod 
est  per  earn  contra  Macedonium  definition.2 

Thus,  as  late  as  the  year  600,  only  the  creed,  but  not  the  canons  of  the  Synod  of  Con- 
stantinople were  accepted  at  Borne  ;  but  on  account  of  its  creed,  Gregory  the  Great  reckons 
it  as  one  of  the  four  Ecumenical  Councils,  which  he  compares  to  the  four  Gospels.  So  also 
before  him  the  popes  Vigilius  and  Pelagius  II,  reckoned  this  Synod  among  the  Ecumenical 
Councils. 

The  question  is,  from  what  date  the  Council  of  Constantinople  was  considered  ecumeni- 
cal by  the  Latins  as  well  as  by  the  Greeks.  We  will  begin  with  the  latter.  Although  as 
we  have  seen,  the  Synod  of  382  had  already  designated  this  council  as  ecumenical,  yet  it 
could  not  for  a  long  time  obtain  an  equal  rank  with  the  Council  of  Nicaea,  for  which  reason 
the  General  Council  of  Ephesus  mentions  that  of  Nicaea  and  its  creed  with  the  greatest 
respect,  but  is  totally  silent  as  to  this  Synod.  Soon  afterwards,  the  so-called  Robber-Synod 
in  449,  spoke  of  two  (General)  Councils,  at  Nicsea  and  Ephesus,  and  designated  the  latter 
as  fj  SevTepa  o-woSos,  as  a  plain  token  that  it  did  not  ascribe  such  a  high  rank  to  the  assembly 

1  Photius,  De  Synodis,  p.  1143,  ed.  Justelli.  a  Greg.,  EpUt,  Lib.  L,  25. 


L  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  381  187 

at  Constantinople.  It  might  perhaps  be  objected  that  only  the  Monophysites,  who  notori- 
ously ruled  the  Bobber-Synod,  used  this  language ;  but  the  most  determined  opponent  of 
the  Monophysites,  their  accuser,  Bishop  Eusebius  of  Doylseum,  in  like  manner  also  brought 
forward  only  the  two  Synods  of  Nicpea  and  Ephesus,  and  declared  that  "he  held  to  the  faith 
of  the  three  hundred  and  eighteen  Fathers  assembled  at  Nicaea,  and  to  all  that  was  done  at 
the  great  and  Holy  Synod  at  Ephesus." 

The  Creed  of  Constantinople  appears  for  the  first  time  to  have  been  highly  honoured  at 
the  fourth  General  Council,  which  had  it  recited  after  that  of  Nicsea,  and  thus  solemnly 
approved  it.  Since  then  this  Synod  has  been  universally  honoured  as  ecumenical  by  the 
Greeks,  and  was  mentioned  by  the  Emperor  Justinian  with  the  Councils  of  Nicsea,  Ephesus, 
and  Chalcedon,  as  of  equal  rank.1 

But  in  the  West,  and  especially  in  Bome,  however  satisfied  people  were  with  the  decree 
of  faith  enacted  by  this  Synod,  and  its  completion  of  the  creed,  yet  its  third  canon,  respect- 
ing the  rank  of  Constantinople,  for  a  long  time  proved  a  hindrance  to  its  acknowledgment. 
This  was  especially  shown  at  the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  and  during  the  time  immediately 
following.  When  at  that  Council  the  creed  of  Constantinople  was  praised,  repeated,  and 
confirmed  the  Papal  Legates  fully  concurred  ;  but  when  the  Council  also  renewed  and  con- 
firmed the  third  canon  of  Constantinople,  the  Legates  left  the  assembly,  lodged  a  protest 
against  it  on  the  following  day,  and  declared  that  the  rules  of  the  hundred  and  fifty  bishops 
at  Constantinople  were  never  inserted  among  the  Synodal  canons  (which  were  recognised  at 
Bome).  The  same  was  mentioned  by  Pope  Leo  himself,  who,  immediately  after  the  close  of 
the  Council  of  Chalcedon  wrote  to  Bishop  Anatolius  of  Constantinople  :  "  that  document  of 
certain  bishops  (i.e.  the  third  canon  of  Constantinople)  was  never  brought  by  your  predeces- 
sors to  the  knowledge  of  the  Apostolic  See."  2  Leo  also,  in  his  105th  letter  to  the  Empress 
Pulcheria,  speaks  just  as  depreciatingly  of  this  Council  of  Constantinople  ;  and  Quesnel  is 
entirely  wrong  in  maintaining  that  the  Papal  Legates  at  the  Synod  of  Chalcedon  at  first 
practically  acknowledged  the  validity  of  the  third  canon  of  Constantinople.  Bishop  Euse- 
bius of  Doylseum  was  equally  mistaken  in  maintaining  at  Chalcedon  itself,  that  the  third 
canon  had  been  sanctioned  by  the  Pope  ;  and  we  shall  have  occasion  further  on,  in  the 
history  of  the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  to  show  the  untenable  character  of  both  statements. 

Pope  Felix  III.  took  the  same  view  as  Pope  Leo,  when,  in  his  letter  to  the  monks  at 
Constantinople  and  Bithynia  in  485,  he  only  spoke  of  three  General  Councils  at  Niceea, 
Ephesus,  and  Chalcedon  ;  neither  did  his  successor  Gelasius  (492-496)  in  his  genuine  decree, 
De  libris  rccipiendis,  mention  this  Synod.  It  may  certainly  be  said,  on  the  other  hand,  that 
in  the  sixth  century  its  ecumenical  character  had  come  to  be  most  distinctly  acknowledged 
in  the  Latin  Church  also,  and,  as  we  have  seen  above,  had  been  expressly  affirmed  by  the 
Popes  Vigilius,  Pelagius  II.,  and  Gregory  the  Great.  But  this  acknowledgment,  even  when 
it  is  not  expressly  stated,  only  referred  to  the  decrees  on  faith  of  the  Council  of  Constanti- 
nople, and  not  to  its  canons,  as  we  have  already  observed  in  reference  to  the  third  and  sixth 
of  them. 


1  In  his  edict  against  the  Three  Chapters.  »  Leo,  Epist,  cvi.  u.,  ed.  Ballerini,  t.  i.,  p.  11C5. 


COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANTINOPLE. 

A.D.    382. 
THE   SYNODICAL   LETTER1 

To  the  right  honourable  lords  our  right  reverend  brethren  and  colleagues,  Damasus, 
Ambrosius,  Britton,  Valerianus,  Ascholius,  Anemius,  Basilius  and  the  rest  of  the  holy 
bishops  assembled  in  the  great  city  of  Rome,  the  holy  synod  of  the  orthodox  bishops 
assembled  at  the  great  city  of  Constantinople  sends  greeting  in  the  Lord. 

To  recount  all  the  sufferings  inflicted  on  us  by  the  power  of  the  Arians,  and  to  attempt 
to  give  information  to  your  reverences,  as  though  you  Avere  not  already  well  acquainted 
with  them,  might  seem  superfluous.  For  Ave  do  not  suppose  your  piety  to  hold  Avhat  is 
befalling  us  as  of  such  secondary  importance  as  that  you  stand  in  any  need  of  informa- 
tion on  matters  Avhich  cannot  but  evoke  your  sympathy.  Nor  indeed  AA'ere  the  storms 
Avhich  beset  us  such  as  to  escape  notice  from  their  insignificance.  Our  persecutions  are 
but  of  yesterday.  The  sound  of  them  still  rings  in  the  ears  alike  of  those  who  suffered 
them  and  of  those  whose  love  made  the  sufferers'  pain  their  oavu.  It  Avas  but  a  day  or 
tAvo  ago,  so  to  speak,  that  some  released  from  chains  in  foreign  lands  returned  to 
their  oavu  churches  through  manifold  afflictions ;  of  others  Avho  had  died  in  exile  the 
relics  Avere  brought  home ;  others  again,  even  after  their  return  from  exile,  found  the 
passion  of  the  heretics  still  at  the  boiling  heat,  and,  slain  by  them  with,  stones  as  Avas 
the  blessed  Stephen,  met  with  a  sadder  fate  in  their  own  than  in  a  stranger's  land. 
Others,  Avorn  aAvay  Avith  various  cruelties,  still  bear  in  their  bodies  the  scars  of  their 
Avounds  and  the  marks  of  Christ.  Who  covdd  tell  the  tale  of  fines,  of  disfranchisements, 
of  individual  confiscations,  of  intrigues,  of  outrages,  of  prisons  ?  In  truth  all  kinds  of 
tribulation  Avere  Avrought  out  beyond  number  in  us,  perhaps  because  we  Avere  paying  the 
penalty  of  sins,  perhaps  because  the  merciful  God  Avas  trying  us  by  means  of  the  multi- 
tude of  our  sufferings.  For  these  all  thanks  to  God,  Avho  by  means  of  such  afflictions 
trained  his  servants  and,  according  to  the  multitude  of  his  mercies,  brought  us  again 
to  refreshment.  We  indeed  needed  long  leisure,  time,  and  toil  to  restore  the  church 
once  more,  that  so,  like  physicians  healing  the  body  after  long  sickness  and  expelling 
its  disease  by  gradual  treatment,  we  might  bring  her  back  to  her  ancient  health  of  true 
religion.  It  is  true  that  on  the  Avhole  we  seem  to  have  been  delivered  from  the  A-iolence 
of  our  persecutions  and  to  be  just  now  recoATering  the  churches  which  haAre  for  a  long 
time  been  the  prey  of  the  heretics.  But  Avolves  are  troublesome  to  us  Avho,  though 
they  haAre  been  driven  from  the  fold,  }-et  harry  the  flock  up  and  doAvn  the  glades,  daring 
to  hold  rival  assemblies,  stirring  seditions  among  the  people,  and  shrinking  from  nothing 
which  can  do  damage  to  the  churches.  So,  as  we  haATe  already  said,  we  needs  must  labour 
all  the  longer.  Since,  however,  you  sliOAved  your  brotherly  love  to  us  by  inviting  us  (as 
though  Ave  Avere  your  own  members)  by  the  letters  of  our  most  religious  emperor  to  the 
synod  Avhich  you  are  gathering  by  divine  permission  at  Rome,  to  the  end  that  since  Ave 
alone  Avere  then  condemned  to  suffer  persecution,  you  should  not  uoav,  Avhen  our  emper- 
ors are  at  one  with  us  as  to  true  religion,  reign  apart  from  us,  but  that  Ave,  to  use  the 
Apostle's  phrase,  should  reign  Avith  you,  our  prayer  was,  if  it  Avere  possible,  all  in  com- 
pany to  leave  our  churches,  and  rather  gratify  our  longing  to  see  you  than  consult  their 
needs.  For  Avho  will  give  us  wings  as  of  a  dove,  and  we  will  fly  and  be  at  rest  ?  But 
this  course  seemed  likely  to  leave  the  churches  Avho  Avere  just  recovering  quite  unde- 
fended, and  the  undertaking  was  to  most  of  us  impossible,  for,  in  accordance  Avith  the  let- 
ters sent  a  year  ago  from  your  holiness  after  the  synod  at  Aquileia  to  the  most  pious 
emperor  Theodosius,  Ave  had  journeyed  to  Constantinople,  equipped  only  for  traA'elliug 

1  Found  in  Tlieod.,  ir.  E.  v.  9.    The  reader  is  warned  against  inaccurate  translations  of  the  dogmatic  portions. 


CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  382  189 

so  far  as  Constantinople,  and  bringing  the  consent  of  the  bishops  remaining  in  the  prov- 
inces of  this  synod,  alone.  We  had  been  in  no  expectation  of  any  longer  journey  nor 
had  heard  a  word  about  it,  before  our  arrival  at  Constantinople.  In  addition  to  all 
this,  and  on  account  of  the  narrow  limits  of  the  appointed  time  which  allowed  of  no  prep- 
aration for  a  longer  journey,  nor  of  communicating  with  the  bishops  of  our  communion 
in  the  provinces  and  of  obtaining  their  consent,  the  journey  to  Rome  was  for  the  major- 
ity impossible.  We  have  therefore  adopted  the  next  best  course  open  to  us  under  the 
circumstances,  both  for  the  better  administration  of  the  church,  and  for  manifesting  our 
love  towards  you,  by  strongly  urging  our  most  venerated,  and  honoured  colleagues  and 
brother  bishops  Gyriacus,  Eusebius  and  Priscianus,  to  consent  to  travel  to  you. 

Through  them  we  wish  to  make  it  plain  that  our  disposition  is  all  for  peace  with  unity 
for  its  sole  object,  and  that  we  are  full  of  zeal  for  the  right  faith.  For  we,  whether  we 
suffered  persecutions,  or  afflictions,  or  the  threats  of  emperors,  or  the  cruelties  of  princes, 
or  any  other  trial  at  the  hands  of  heretics,  have  undergone  all  for  the  sake  of  the  evan- 
gelic faith,  ratified  by  the  three  hundred  and  eighteen  fathers  at  Nicaaa  in  Bithynia. 
This  is  the  faith  which  ought  to  be  sufficient  for  you,  for  us,  for  all  who  wrest  not  the 
word  of  the  true  faith ;  for  it  is  the  ancient  faith  ;  it  is  the  faith  of  our  baptism ;  it  is 
the  faith  that  teaches  us  to  believe  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.  According  to  this  faith  there  is  one  Godhead,  Power  and  Substance  of  the  Father 
and  of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  the  dignity  being  equal,  and  the  majesty  being 
equal  in  three  perfect  hypostases,  i.e.  three  perfect  persons.  Thus  there  is  no  room 
for  the  heresy  of  Sabellius  by  the  confusion  of  the  h}Tpostases,  i.e.  the  destruction  of  the 
personalities  ;  thus  the  blasphemy  of  theEunomians,  of  the  Arians,  and  of  the  Pneumato- 
machi  is  nullified,  which  divides  the  substance,  the  nature,  and  the  godhead,  and  super- 
induces on  the  uncreated  consubstantial  and  co-eternal  Trinity  a  nature  posterior,  created 
and  of  a  different  substance.  We  moreover  preserve  unperverted  the  doctrine  of  the 
incarnation  of  the  Lord,  holding  the  tradition  that  the  dispensation  of  the  flesh  is  neither 
soidless  nor  mindless  nor  imperfect ;  and  knowing  full  well  that  God's  Word  was  perfect 
before  the  ages,  and  became  perfect  man  in  the  last  days  for  our  salvation. 

Let  this  suffice  for  a  summary  of  the  doctrine  which  is  fearlessly  and  frankly  preached 
by  us,  and  concerning  which  you  will  be  able  to  be  still  further  satisfied  if  you  will  deign 
to  read  the  tome  of  the  synod  of  Antioch,  and  also  that  tome  issued  last  year  by  the 
Ecumenical  Council  held  at  Constantinople,  in  which  we  have  set  forth  our  confession 
of  the  faith  at  greater  length,  and  have  appended  an  anathema  against  the  heresies  which 
innovators  have  recently  inscribed. 

Now  as  to  the  particular  administration  of  individual  churches,  an  ancient  custom,  as 
you  know,  has  obtained,  confirmed  by  the  enactment  of  the  holy  fathers  of  Nicaea,  that  in 
every  province,  the  bishops  of  the  province,  and,  with  their  consent,  the  neighbouring  bish- 
ops with  them,  should  perform  ordinations  as  expediency  may  require.  In  conforming 
with  these  customs  note  that  other  churches  have  been  administered  by  us  and  the  priests 
of  the  most  famous  churches  publicly  appointed.  Accordingly  over  the  new  made  (if  the 
expression  be  allowable)  church  at  Constantinople,  which,  as  though  from  a  lion's  mouth, 
we  have  lately  snatched  by  God's  mercy  from  the  blasphemy  of  the  heretics,  Ave  have  or- 
dained bishop  the  right  reverend  and  most  religious  Nectarius,  in  the  presence  of  the  Ecu- 
menical Council,  with  common  consent,  before  the  most  religious  emperor  Theodosius,  and 
with  the  assent  of  all  the  clergy  and  of  the  whole  city.  And  over  the  most  ancient  and 
truly  apostolic  church  in  Syria,  where  first  the  noble  name  of  Christians  Avas  given  them, 
the  bishops  of  the  province  and  of  the  eastern  diocese  have  met  together  and  canonically 
ordained  bishop  the  right  reverend  and  most  religious  Flavianus,  with  the  consent  of  all 
the  church,  avIio  as  though  Avith  one  voice  joined  in  expressing  their  respect  for  him. 
This  rightful  ordination  also  received  the  sanction  of  the  General  Council.  Of  the  church 
at  Jerusalem,  mother  of  all  the  churches,  Ave  make  knoAvn  that  the  right  reverend  and 
most  religious  Cyril  is  bishop,  avIio  Avas  some  time  ago  canonically  ordained  by  the  bish- 
ops of  the  province,  and  has  in  several  places  fought  a  good  fight  against  the  Arians. 
We  beseech  your  reverence  to  rejoice  at  Avhat  has  thus  been  rightly  and  canonically  set- 
tled by  us,  by  the  intervention  of  spiritual  love  and  by  the  influence  of  the  fear  of  the 


190 


CONSTANTINOPLE.    A.D.  382 


Lord,  compelling  the  feelings  of  men,  and  making  the  edification  of  churches  of  more 
importance  than  individual  grace  or  favour.  Thus  since  among  us  there  is  agreement 
in  the  faith  and  Christian  charity  has  been  established,  we  shall  cease  to  use  the  phrase 
condemned  by  the  apostles,  I  am  of  Paul  aud  I  of  Apollos  and  I  of  Cephas,  and  all 
appearing  as  Christ's,  who  in  us  is  not  divided,  by  God's  grace  we  will  keep  the  body 
of  the  church  unrent,  and  will  boldly  stand  at  the  judgment  seat  of  the  Lord. 


THE  THIRD  ECUMENICAL   COUNCIL. 
THE  COUNCIL  OF  EPHESUS. 

A.D.  431 

Emperors. — Theodosius  II.  and  Valentinian  III. 
Pope. — Celestine  I. 

Elenchus. 


Historical  Introduction. 

Note  on  the  Emperor's  Edict  to  the  Synod. 

Extracts  from  the  Acts,  Session  I. 

St.  Cyril's  Letter  to  Nestorius,  Intelligo 
quos  dam. 

Continucdion  of  Session  I. 

Historical  Introduction  to  Cyril's  Anathe- 
matisms. 

The  Canonical  Epistle  of  St.  Cyril,  Cum 
Salvator  noster. 

The  XII.  Ancdhematisms  of  St.  Cyril,  and 


Decree  against  Nestorius,  with  Notes. 

Extracts  from  the  Acts,  Session  II. 

St.  Celestine's  Letter  to  the  Synod. 

Continuation  of  Session  II. 

Session  III. 

The  Canons,  loitli  the  Ancient  EpAtome,  and 
Notes. 

Excursus  to  Canon  j.,  On  the  Conciliahu- 
lum  of  John  of  Aniioch. 

Excursus  to  Canon  iv.,  On  Pelagianism. 

Excursus   to    Canon   vii.,    On   the   words 


Nestorius 's     Counter  -  ancdhematisms,     with  ttI<jtlv  kripav, 


Notes. 
Excursus  to  Anath.  I.,  On  the  word  ®cot6- 

KOS. 

Excursus  to  Anath.  IX.,  On  Jwio  our 
Lord  loorhed  Miracles,  ivith  Theodoret's 
Counter-statement. 

Extracts  from  the  Acts,  Session  I.  continued. 


A  Letter  from  the  Synod  to  the  Synod  in 
Pamphylia. 

The  Letter  of  the  Synod  to  Pope  Celes- 
tine. 

The  Definition  against  the  Messalians, 
with  Notes. 

The  Decree  re  Euprepius  and  Cyril. 


HISTORICAL   INTRODUCTION. 

(Bossuet,  Def.  Cler.  Gall,  Lib.  vij.,  Cap.  ix.  et  seqq.  Abridged.  Translation  by  Allies.) 
The  innovation  of  Nestorius,  Bishop  of  Constantinople,  is  known  ;  how  he  divided  into 
two  the  person  of  Christ.  Pope  St.  Celestine,  watchful,  according  to  his  office,  over  the 
affairs  of  the  Church,  had  charged  the  blessed  Cyril,  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  to  send  him  a 
certain  report  of  the  doctrine  of  Nestorius,  already  in  bad  repute.  Cyril  declares  this  in  his 
letter  to  Nestorius  ;  and  so  he  writes  to  Celestine  a  complete  account,  and  sets  forth  the 
doctrines  of  Nestorius  and  his  own  ;  he  sends  him  two  letters  from  himself  to  Nestorius, 
who  likewise,  by  his  own  letters  and  explanations,  endeavoured  to  draw  Celestine  to  his  side. 
Thus  the  holy  Pontiff,  having  been  most  fully  informed  by  letters  from  both  sides,  is  thus 
inquired  of  by  Cyril.  "  We  have  not  confidently  abstained  from  Communion  with  him  (Nes- 
torius) before  informing  you  of  this  ;  condescend,  therefore,  to  unfold  your  judgment,  that 
we  may  clearly  know  whether  we  ought  to  communicate  with  him  who  cherishes  such  erro- 
neous doctrine."  And  he  adds,  that  his  judgment  should  be  written  to  the  other  Bishops 
also,  "  that  all  with  one  mind  may  hold  firm  in  one  sentence."  Here  is  the  Apostolic  See 
manifestly  consulted  by  so  great  a  man,  presiding  over  the  second,  or  at  least  the  third, 
Patriarchal  See,  and  its  judgment  awaited  ;  and  nothing  remained  but  that  Celestine,  being 
duly  consulted,  should  perform  his  Apostolic  office.  But  how  he  did  this,  the  Acts  have 
shown.  In  those  Acts  he  not  only  approves  the  letters  and  doctrine  of  Cyril,  but  disap- 
proves, too,  the  perverse  dogma  of  Nestorius,  and  that  distinctly,  because  he  was  unwilling 
to  call  the  blessed  Virgin  Mother  of  God  :  and  he  decrees  that  he  should  be  deprived  of  the 
Episcopate  and  Communion  unless,  within  ten  days  from  the  date  of  the  announcing  of  the 
sentence,  he  openly  rejects  this  faithless  innovation,  which  endeavours  to  separate  what 
Scripture  joineth  together — that  is,  the  Person  of  Christ.  Here  is  the  doctrine  of  Nestorius 
expressly  disapproved,  and  a  sentence  of  the  Roman  Pontiff  on  a  matter  of  Faith  most 
clearly  pronounced  under  threat  of  deposition  and  excommunication  :  then,  that  nothing  be 
wanting,  the  holy  Pope  commits  his  authority  to  Cyril  to  carry  into  execution  that  sentence 
"associating,"  he  saith  to  Cyril,  "  the  authority  of  our  See,  and  using  our  person,  and  place, 
with  power."  So  to  Cyril ;  so  to  Nestorius  himself;  so  to  the  clergy  of  Constantinople  ;  so 
to  John  of  Antioch,  then  the  Bishop  of  the  third  or  fourth  Patriarchal  See  ;  so  to  Juvenal, 
Bishop  of  the  Holy  City,  whom  the  Council  of  Nice  had  ordered  to  be  especially  honoured : 
so  he  writes  to  the  other  Bishops  also,  that  the  sentence  given  may  be  duly  and  in  order 
made  known  to  all.  Cyril  proceeds  to  execute  his  office,  and  performs  all  that  he  had  been 
commanded.  He  promulgates  and  executes  the  decrees  of  Celestine  ;  declares  to  Nestorius, 
that  after  the  ten  days  prescribed  and  set  forth  by  Celestine,  he  would  have  no  portion, 
intercourse,  or  place  with  the  priesthood.  Nothing  evidently  is  wanting  to  the  Apostolical 
authority  being  most  fully  exercised. 

But  Nestorius,  bishop  of  the  royal  city,  possessed  such  influence,  had  deceived  men's 
minds  with  such  an  appearance  of  piety,  had  gained  so  many  bishops  and  enjoyed  such 
favour  with  the  younger  Theodosius  and  the  great  men,  that  he  could  easily  throw  every- 
thing into  commotion  ;  and  thus  there  was  need  of  an  Ecumenical  Council,  the  question 
being  most  important,  and  the  person  of  the  highest  dignity  ;  because  many  bishops, 
amongst  these  almost  all  of  the  East — that  is,  of  the  Patriarchate  of  Antioch,  and  the  Patri- 
arch John  himself — were  ill  disposed  to  Cyril,  and  seemed  to  favour  Nestorius  :  because 
men's  feelings  were  divided,  and  the  whole  empire  of  the  East  seemed  to  fluctuate  between 
Cyril  and  Nestorius.     Such  was  the  need  of  an  Ecumenical  Council. 

The  Emperor,  moved  by  these  and  other  reasons,  wrote  to  Cyril, — "  It  is  our  will  that  the 


EPHESUS.     A.D.  431  193 

holy  doctrine  be  discussed  and  examined  in  a  sacred  Synod,  and  that  be  ratified  which  ap- 
peareth  agreeable  to  the  nght  faith,  whether  the  wrong  party  be  pardoned  by  the  Fathers 


or  no 


Here  we  see  three  things:  First,  after  the  judgment  of  St.  Celestine,  another  is  still 
required,  that  of  the  Council  ;  secondly,  that  these  two  things  would  rest  with  the  Fathers 
to  judge  of  doctrine  and  of  persons ;  thirdly,  that  the  judgment  of  the  Council  would  be 
decisive  and  final. 

He  adds,  "those  who  everywhere  preside  over  the  Priesthood,  and  through  whom  we  our- 
selves are  and  shall  be  professing  the  truth,  must  be  judges  of  this  matter."  See  on  whose 
faith  we  rest.     See  m  whose  judgment  is  the  final  and  irreversible  authority 

Both  the  Emperor  affirmed,  and  the  bishops  confessed,  that  this  was  done  according  to 
the  Ecclesiastical  Canons.  And  so  all,  and  Celestine  himself,  prepared  themselves  for  the 
Council.  Cyril  does  no  more,  though  named  by  Celestine  to  execute  the  pontifical  decree 
Nestorius  remained  in  his  original  rank  ;  the  sentence  of  the  universal  Council  is  awaited  ■ 
and  the  Emperor  had  expressly  decreed,  "that  before  the  assembling  and  common  sentence 
of  the  most  holy  Council  no  change  should  be  made  in  any  matter  at  all,  on  any  private 
authority       Rightly   and  in  order  ;  for  this  was  demanded  by  the  majesty  of  an  Liver- 

that  Sol-!  IT       r      f^t1  °hejed  and  ^  bish°PS  rGSted-     And  ft  ™  established, 
that  al  hough  the  sentence  of  the  Roman  Pontiff  on  matters  of  Faith,  and  on  persons  judged 

for  violation  of  the  Faith  had  been  passed  and  promulged,  all  was  suspended,  while  the 
^authority  of  the  universal  Council  was  awaited. 

Having  gone  over  what  preceded  the  Council,  we  review  the  acts  of  the  Council  itself 
and  begin  with  the  first  course  of  proceeding.     After,  therefore,  the  bishops  and  Nestorius 
himself  were  come  to  Ephesus,  the  universal  Council  began,  Cyril  being  president,  and  rep- 
resenting Celestine,  as  being  appointed  by  the  Pontiff  himself  to  execute  his  sentence.     In 
the  first  course  o   proceeding  this  was  done.     First,  the  above-mentioned  letter  of  the  Em- 
peror was  read,  that  an  Ecumenical  Council  should  be  held,  and  all  proceedings  in  the 
mean  time  be  suspended;  this  letter,  I  say,  was  read,  and  placed  on  the  lets,  and  it  was  ap- 
proved by  the  Fa  hers,  that  all  the  decrees  of  Celestine  in  the  matter  of  Nestorius  had  been 
suspended  un .til  the  holy  Council  should  give  its  sentence.     You  will  ask  if  it  was  the  will 
of  the  Council  merely  that  the  Emperor  should  be  allowed  to  prohibit,  in  the  interim,  effect 
being  given  to  the  sentence  of  the  Apostolic  See.     Not  so,  according  to  the  Act.;  ;  but 
*S  -tervention  of  a  General  Council's  authority  (the  convocation  of  which,  ac 
coiding  to  the  discipline  of  those  times,  was  left  to  the  Emperor),  the  Council  itself  under- 
stood  that  a     proceedings  were  of  course  suspended,  and  depended  on  the  sentence  of  the 
Council      Wherefore,  though  the  decree  of  the  Pontiff  had  been  promulged  and  notified,  and 
the  ten  days  had  long  been  past,  Nestorius  was  held  by  the  Council  itself  to  be  a  bishop,  and 
called  by  the  name  of  most  religious  bishop,  and  by  that  name,  too,  thrice  cited  and  sum- 
moned  to  take  his  seat  with  the  other  bishops  in  the  holy  Council ;  for  this  expression,  "to 
take   his  seat     is  distinctly  written;  and  it  is  added,  "in  order  to  answer  to  what  was 
charged  against  him."     For  it  was  their  full  purpose  that  he  should  recognise  in  whatever 
way  the  Ecumenical  Council,  as  he  would  then  afterwards  be,  beyond  doubt,  answerable  to 
it ;  but  he  refused  to  come,  and  chose  to  have  his  doors  besieged  with  an  armed  force,  that 
no  one  might  approach  him. 

Thereupon  as  the  Emperor  commanded,  and  the  Canons  required,  the  rule  of  Faith  was 

set  forth  and  the  Nicene  Creed  read,  as  the  standard  to  which  all  should  be  referred,  and 

hen  the  letters  of  Cyril  and  Nestorius  were  examined  in  order.     The  letter  of  Cyril  was  first 

brought  before  the  judgment  of  the  Council.     That  letter,  I  mean,  concerning  the  Faith  to 

Nestorius,  so  expressly  approved  by  Pope  Celestine,  of  which  he  had  declared  to  Cyril   «  We 

VOL.    XIV.  0  J       ' 


194  EPHESUS.     A.D.  431 


Bee  that  you  hold  and  maintain  all  that  we  hold  and  maintain  "  ;  which,  by  the  decree  against 
Nestorius,  published  to  all  Churches,  he  had  approved,  and  wishes  to  be  considered  as  a 
canonical  monition  against  Nestorius  :  that  letter,  I  repeat,  was  examined,  at  the  proposition 
of  Cyril  himself,  in  these  words  :  "I  am  persuaded  that  I  have  in  nothing  departed  from 
the  orthodox  Faith,  or  the  Nicene  Creed ;  wherefore  I  beseech  your  Holiness  to  set  forth 
openly  whether  I  have  written  this  correctly,  blamelessly,  and  in  accordance  with  that 
holy  Council.'' 

And  are  there  those  who  say  that  questions  concerning  the  Faith,  once  judged  by  the 
Boman  Pontiff  on  his  Apostolical  authority,  are  examined  in  general  Councils,  in  order  to 
understand  their  contents,  but  not  to  decide  on  their  substance,  as  being  still  a  matter  of 
question  ?  Let  them  hear  Cyril,  the  President  of  the  Council ;  let  them  attend  to  what  he 
proposes  for  the  inquiry  of  the  Council  ;  and  though  he  were  conscious  of  no  error  in  him- 
self yet,  not  to  trust  himself,  he  asked  for  the  sentence  of  the  Council  in  these  words — 
"  whether  I  have  written  correctly  and  blamelessly,  or  not."  This  Cyril,  the  chief  of  the 
Council,  proposes  for  their  consideration.  Who  ever  even  heard  it  whispered  that,  after  a 
final  and  irreversible  judgment  of  the  Church  on  a  matter  of  Faith,  any  such  inquiry  or 
question  was  made  ?  It  was  never  done,  for  that  would  be  to  doubt  about  the  Faith  itself, 
when  declared  and  discussed.  But  this  was  done  after  the  judgment  of  Pope  Celestine  ; 
neither  Cyril,  nor  anyone  else,  thought  of  any  other  course  :  that,  therefore,  was  not  a  final 
and  irreversible  judgment. 

In  answer  to  this  question  the  Fathers  in  order  give  their  judgment — "  that  the  Nicene 
Creed,  and  the  letter  of  Cyril,  in  all  things  agree  and  harmonise."  Here  is  inquiry  and  ex- 
amination, and  then  judgment.     The  Acts  speak  for  themselves — we  say  not  here  a  word. 

Next  that  letter  of  Nestorius  was  produced,  which  Celestine  had  pronounced  blasphe- 
mous and  impious.  It  is  read  :  then  at  the  instance  of  Cyril  it  is  examined,  "  whether  this, 
too,  be  agreeable  to  the  Faith  set  forth  by  the  holy  Council  of  the  Nicene  Fathers,  or  not." 
It  is  precisely  the  same  form  according  to  which  Cyril's  letter  was  examined.  The  Fathers, 
in  order,  give  judgment  that  it  disagreed  from  the  Nicene  Creed,  and  was,  therefore,  censur- 
able. The  letter  of  Nestorius  is  disapproved  in  the  same  manner,  by  the  same  rule,  by 
which  that  of  Cyril  was  approved.  Here,  twice  in  the  same  proceeding  of  the  Council  of 
Ephesus,  a  judgment  of  the  Roman  Pontiff  concerning  the  Catholic  Faith,  uttered  and  pub- 
lished, is  reconsidered.  What  he  had  approved,  and  what  he  had  disapproved,  is  equally 
examined,  and,  only  after  examination,  confirmed. 

In  the  mean  time,  the  bishops  Arcadins  and  Projectus,  and  the  presbyter  Philip,  had  been 
chosen  by  Celestine  to  be  present  at  the  Council  of  Ephesus,  with  a  special  commission 
from  the  Apostolic  See,  and  the  whole  Council  of  the  West.  So  they  come  from  Pome  to 
Ephesus,  and  appear  at  the  holy  Council,  and  here  the  second  procedure  commences. 

After  reading  the  letter  of  Celestine,  the  Legates,  in  pursuance,  say  to  the  bishops : 
"  Let  your  Holiness  consider  the  form  of  the  letters  of  the  holy  and  venerable  Pope  Celes- 
tine the  Bishop,  who  hath  exhorted  your  Holiness,  not  as  instructing  those  who  are  igno- 
rant, but  as  reminding  those  who  are  aware  :  in  order  that  you  may  command  to  be  com- 
pletely and  finally  settled  according  to  the  Canon  of  our  common  Faith,  and  the  utility  of 
the  Catholic  Church,  what  he  has  before  determined,  and  has  now  the  goodness  to  remind 
you  of."  This  is  the  advantage  of  a  Council ;  after  whose  sentence  there  is  no  new  discus- 
sion, or  new  judgment,  but  merely  execution.  And  this  the  Legates  request  to  be  com- 
manded by  the  Council,  in  which  they  recognise  that  supreme  authoritjT. 

It  behoved,  also,  that  the  Legates,  sent  to  the  Council  on  a  special  mission,  should 
understand  whether  the  proceedings  against  Nestorius  had  been  pursued  according  to  the 
requisition  of  the  Canons,  and  due  respect  to  the  Apostolic  See.     This  we  have  already  often 


EPIIESUS.     A.D.  431  195 


said.  Wherefore,  with  reason,  they  require  the  Acts  to  be  communicated,  "that  we  too" 
say  they,  "may  confirm  them."  The  proceedings  themselves  will  declare  what  that  confirma 
tion  means.  After  that,  at  the  request  of  the  Legates,  the  Acts  against  Nestorius  were  given 
them,  they  thus  report  about  them  at  the  third  procedure  :  "  We  have  found  all  things 
judged  canonically,  and  according  to  the  Church's  discipline."  Therefore  judgments  of  the 
Apostolic  See  are  canonically  and,  according  to  the  Church's  discipline,  reconsidered  after 
deliberation,  in  a  General  Council,  and  judgment  passed  upon  them.  After  the  Legates  had 
approved  the  Acts  against  Nestorius  communicated  to  them,  they  request  that  all  which  had 
been  read  and  done  at  Ephesus  from  the  beginning,  should  be  read  afresh  in  public  Ses- 
sion,  "in  order,"  they  say,  «  that  obeying  the  form  of  the  most  holy  Pope  Celestine  who 
hath  committed  tins  care  to  us,  we  may  be  enabled  to  confirm  the  judgment  also  of 'your 
Holiness."  After  these  all  had  been  read  afresh,  and  the  Legates  agreed  to  them,  Cyril  pro- 
poses to  the  holy  Council,  "That  the  Legates,  by  their  signature,  as  was  customary,  should 
make  plain  and  manifest  their  canonical  agreement  with  the  Council."  To  this  question  of 
Cyril  the  Council  thus  answers,  and  decrees  that  the  Legates,  by  their  subscription,  confirm 
the  Acts  ;  by  which  place  this  confirmation,  spoken  of  by  the  Council,  is  clearly  nothing  else 
but  to  make  their  assent  plain  and  manifest,  as  Cyril  proposed. 

Finally,  Celestine  himself,  after  the  conclusion  of  the  whole  matter,  sends  a  letter  to  the 
holy  Council  of  Ephesus,  which  he  thus  begins  :  "At  length  we  must  rejoice  at  the  conclu- 
sion oi  evils.       The  learned  reader  understands  where  he  recognizes  the  conclusion  ;  that  is 
after  the  condemnation  of  Nestorius  by  the  infallible  authority  of  an  Ecumenical  Council' 
viz.,  of  the  whole  Catholic  Church.    He  proceeds  :  "We  see,  that  you,  with  us,  have  executed 
this  matter  so  faithfully  transacted."     All  decree,  and  all  execute,  that  is,  by  Rivinff  a  com- 
mon judgment.     Whence  Celestine  adds,  "We  have  been  informed  of  a  just  deposition  and 
a  still  juster  exaltation  :  •  the  deposition  of  Nestorius,  begun,  indeed,  by  the  Roman  See  but 
brought  to  a  conclusion  by  the  sentence  of  the  Council  ;  to  a  full  and  complete  settlement 
as  we  have  seen  above  :  the  exaltation  of  Maximianus,  who  was  substituted  in  place  of  Nes- 
torius immediately  after  the  Ephesine  decrees ;  this  is  the  conclusion  of  the  question.     Even 
Celestine  himself  recognises  this  conclusion  to  lie  not  in  his  own  examination  and  imm- 
inent, but  in  that  of  an  Ecumenical  Council.     And  this  was  done  in  that  Council  in  which  it 
is  admitted  that  the  authority  of  the  Apostolic  See  was  most  clearly  set  forth,  not  only  by 
words,  but  by  deeds,  of  any  since  the  birth  of  Christ.     At  least  the  Holy  Council  gives  ere- 
deuce  to  Philip  uttering  these  true  and  magnificent  encomiums,  concerning  the  dignity  of 
the  Apostolic  See,  and  "Peter  the  head  and  pillar  of  the  Faith,  and  foundation  of  the  Catho- 
lic Church,  and  by  Christ's  authority  administering  the  keys,  who  to  this  very  time  lives 
ever,  and  exercises  judgment,  in  his  successors."     This,  he  says,  after  having  seen  all  the 
Acts  of  the  Council  itself,  which  we  have  mentioned,  so  that  we  may  indeed  understand,  that 
all  these  pnvieges  of  Peter  and  the  Apostolic  See  entirely  agree  with  the  decrees  of  the 
Council,  and  the  judgment  entered  into  afresh,  and  deliberation  upon  matters  of  Faith  held 
after  the  Apostolic  See. 


o  2 


NOTE    ON    THE  EMPERORS  EDICT  TO   THE   SYNOD. 

Neither  of  the  Emperors  could  personally  attend  the  Council  of  Ephesus  and  accord- 
ingly Theodosius  II.,  appointed  the  Count  Candidian,  Captain  of  the  imperial  bodyguard,  the 
protector  of  the  council,  to  sit  in  the  room  of  the  Emperors.  In  making  this  appointment 
he  addressed  an  edict  to  the  synod  -which  will  be  found  in  the  Concilia  and  of  which  Hefele 
gives  the  following  synopsis. 

(Hefele,  Hist,  of  the  Councils,  Vol.  III.,  p.  43.) 
Candidian  is  to  take  no  immediate  part  in  the  discussions  on  contested  points  of  faith, 
for  it  is  not  becoming  that  one  -who  does  not  belong  to  the  number  of  the  bishops  should 
mix  himself  up  in  the  examination  and  decision  of  theological  controversies.  On  the  con- 
trary, Candidian  was  to  remove  from  the  city  the  monks  and  laymen  -who  had  come  or 
should  afterwards  come  to  Ephesus  out  of  curiosity,  so  that  disorder  and  confusion  should 
not  be  caused  by  those  who  were  in  no  way  needed  for  the  examination  of  the  sacred  doc- 
trines. He  was,  besides,  to  watch  lest  the  discussions  among  the  members  of  the  Synod 
themselves  should  degenerate  into  violent  disputes  and  hinder  the  more  exact  investigation 
of  truth  ;  and,  on  the  contrary,  see  that  every  statement  should  be  heard  with  attention,  and 
that  every  one  put  forward  in  view,  or  his  objections,  without  lot  or  hindrance,  so  that  at 
last  an  unanimous  decision  might  be  arrived  at  in  peace  by  the  holy  Synod.  But  above  all, 
Candidian  was  to  take  care  that  no  member  of  the  Synod  should  attempt,  before  the  close 
of  the  transactions,  to  go  home,  or  to  the  court,  or  elsewhere.  Moreover,  he  was  not  to  allow 
that  any  other  matter  of  controversy  should  be  taken  into  consideration  before  the  settle- 
ment of  the  principal  point  of  doctrine  before  the  Council. 


EXTRACTS  FROM  THE  ACTS. 


SESSION  I. 

[Before  the  arrival  of  the  Papal  Legates.] 
(Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  III.,  col.  459  et  seqq.) 


The  Nicene  Synod  set  forth  this  faith  : 

We  believe  in  one  God,  etc. 

When  this  creed  had  been  recited,  Peter 
the  Presbyter  of  Alexandria,  and  primicer- 
ius  of  the  notaries  said  : 

We  have  in  our  hands  the  letter  of  the 
most  holy  and  most  reverend  archbishop 
Cyril,  which  he  wrote  to  the  most  reverend 


Nestorius,  filled  with  counsel  and  advice, 
on  account  of  his  aberration  from  the  right 
faith.  I  will  read  this  if  your  holiness 
[i.e.,  the  holy  Synod]  so  orders.  .  .  . 
The  letter  began  as  follows : 

KaratyXvapovcn  fiev,  to?  atcovo),  k  t.  A. 

Intelligo  quosdam  rnea3,  etc. 


THE  EPISTLE  OF  CYRIL  TO  NESTORIUS. 


(Labbe   and   Cossart,   Concilia,    Tom.    III.,    col.  315 
LXXVII.  [Cyril.,  Opera,  Tom.  X.];  Epist  iv.,  col.  43.) 


Migne,  Pair.   Grcec,   Tom. 


To  the  most  religious  and  beloved  of 
God,  fellow  minister  Nestorius,  Cyril  sends 
greeting  in  the  Lord. 

I  hear  that  some  are  rashly  talking  of 
the  estimation  in  which  I  hold  your  holi- 
ness, and  that  this  is  frequently  the  case 
especially  at  the  times  that  meetings  are 
held  of  those  in  authority.  And  perchance 
they  think  in  so  doing  to  say  something 
agreeable  to  you,  but  they  speak  senseless- 
ly, for  they   have  suffered  no  injustice  at 


a  brother  in  the  Lord,  to  propose  the  word 
of  teaching  and  the  doctrine  of  the  faith 
with  all  accuracy  to  the  people,  and  to  con- 
sider that  the  giving  of  scandal  to  one  even 
of  the  least  of  those  who  believe  in  Christ, 
exposes  a  body  to  the  unbearable  indigna- 
tion of  God.  And  of  how  great  diligence 
and  skill  there  is  need  when  the  multitude 
of  those  grieved  is  so  great,  so  that  we 
may  administer  the  healing  word  of  truth  to 
them  that  seek  it.     But  this  we  shall  ac- 


my  hands,  but  have  been  exposed  by  me  complisli  most  excellently  if  we  shall  turn 
only  to  their  profit ;  this  man  as  an  oppress-  over  the  words  of  the  holy  Fathers,  and  are 
or  of  the  blind  and  needy,  and  that  as  one  ,  zealous  to  obey  their  commands,  proving 
who  wounded  his  mother  with  a  sword.  [  ourselves,  whether  Ave  be  in  the  faith  ac- 
Another  because  he  stole,  in  collusion  with  '  cording  to  that  which  is  written,  and  con- 
his  waiting  maid,  another's  money,  and  had  '  form  our  thoughts  to  their  upright  and  ir- 
always  laboured  under  the  imputation  of  I  reprehensible  teaching, 
such  like  crimes  as  no  one  would  wish  even  ;  The  holy  and  great  Synod  therefore  says, 
one  of  his  bitterest  enemies  to  be  laden  that  the  only  begotten  Son,  born  according 
with.1  I  take  little  reckoning  of  the  words  .  to  nature  of  God  the  Father,  very  God  of 
of  such  people,  for  the  disciple  is  not  j  very  God,  Light  of  Light,  by  whom  the 
above  his  Master,  nor  would  I  stretch  the ',  Father  made  all  things,  came  down,  and 
measure  of  my  narrow  brain  above  the  i  Avas  incarnate,  and  Avas  made  man,  suffered, 
Fathers,  for  no  matter  Avhat  path  of  life  one  and  rose  again  the  third  day,  and  as- 
pursues  it  is  hardly  possible  to  escape  the  <  cended  into  heaATen.  These  Avords  and 
smirching  of  the  Avicked,  Avhose  mouths  are  |  these  decrees  we  ought  to  folloAV,  consider- 
full  of  cursing  and  bitterness,  and  avIio  at  the  ing  Avhat  is  meant  by  the  Word  of  God  be- 


last  must  give  an  account  to  the  Judge  of  all. 
But  I  return  to  the  point  Avhich  especial- 


ing  incarnate  and  made  man.     For  Ave  do 
not  say  that  the  nature  of  the  Word  Avas 


ly  I  had  in  mind.     And  hoav  I  urge  you,  as  changed  and  became  flesh,  or  that  it  Avas 


1  Rohrbacher,  in  his  famous  Histoire  Universelle  de  VEUsc 
Catholiqiw,  Tome  IV.  ( Septieme  Edition),  Livre  xxxix. ,  p.  394,  in- 
forms us  that  this  letter  gives  the  names  of  some  of  Cyril's  calum- 


niators !    The  text  he  used  must  have  been  different  from  the 
one  now  accessible  to  scholars. 


198 


EPilESUS.     A.D.  431 


converted  into  a  whole  man  consisting  of 
soul  and  body ;  but  rather  that  the  Word 
having  personally  united  to  himself  flesh 
animated  by  a  rational  soul,  did  in  an  in- 
effable and  inconceivable  manner  become 
man,  and  was  called  the  Son  of  Man,  not 
merely  as  willing  or  being  pleased  to  be  so 
called,  neither  on  account  of  taking  to  him- 
self a  person,  but  because  the  two  natures 
being  brought  together  in  a  true  union, 
there  is  of  both  one  Christ  and  one  Son ; 
for  the  difference  of  the  natures  is  not  taken 
away  by  the  union,  but  rather  the  divinity 
and  the  humanity  make  perfect  for  us  the 
one  Lord  Jesus  Christ  by  their  ineffable  and 
inexpressible  union.  So  then  he  who  had 
an  existence  before  all  ages  and  was  born 
of  the  Father,  is  said  to  have  been  born  ac- 
cording to  the  flesh  of  a  woman,  not  as 
though  his  divine  nature  received  its  begin- 
ning of  existence  in  the  holy  Virgin,  for  it 
needed  not  any  second  generation  after  that 
of  the  Father  (for  it  would  be  absurd  and 
foolish  to  say  that  he  who  existed  before  all 
ages,  coeternal  with  the  Father,  needed  any 
second  beginning  of  existence),  but  since, 
for  us  and  for  our  salvation,  he  personally 
united  to  himself  an  human  body,  and  came 
forth  of  a  woman,  he  is  in  this  way  said  to 
be  born  after  the  flesh ;  for  he  was  not  first 
born  a  common  man  of  the  holy  Virgin, 
and  then  the  Word  came  down  and  entered 
into  him,  but  the  union  being  made  in  the 
womb  itself,  he  is  said  to  endure  a  birth 
after  the  flesh,  ascribing  to  himself  the  birth 
of  his  own  flesh.  On  this  account  Ave  say 
that  he  suffered  and  rose  again ;  not  as  if 
God  the  Word  suffered  in  his  own  nature 
stripes,  or  the  piercing  of  the  nails,  or  any 
other  wounds,  for  the  Divine  nature  is  in- 
capable of  suffering,  inasmuch  as  it  is  incor- 
poreal, but  since  that  which  had  become  his 
own  body  suffered  in  this  way,  he  is  also 
said  to  suffer  for  us ;  for  he  who  is  in  him- 
self incapable  of  suffering  was  in  a  suffer- 
ing bocby.  In  the  same  manner  also  we 
conceive  respecting  his  dying  ;  for  the  Word 
of  God  is  by  nature  immortal  and  incor- 
ruptible, and  life  and  life-giving;  since, 
however,  his  own  body  did,  as  Paul  says,  by 
the  grace  of  God  taste  death  for  every  man, 
he  himself  is  said  to  have  suffered  death  for 
us,  not  as  if  he  had  any  experience  of  death 
in  his  own  nature  (for  it  would  be  madness 
to  say  or  think  this),  but  because,  as  I  have 


just  said,  his  flesh  tasted  death.     In  like 
manner  his  flesh  being  raised  again,  it  is 


spoken  of  as  his  resurrection,  not  as  if  he 
had  fallen  into  corruption  (God  forbid),  but 
because  his  own  body  was  raised  again. 
We,  therefore,  confess  one  Christ  and  Lord, 
not  as  worshipping  a  man  loith  the  Word 
(lest  this  expression  "with  the  Word" 
should  suggest  to  the  mind  the  idea  of  di- 
vision), but  Avorshipping  him  as  one  and 
the  same,  forasmuch  as  the  body  of  the  Word, 
with  which  he  sits  with  the  Father,  is  not  sep- 
arated from  the  Word  himself,  not  as  if  two 
sons  were  sitting  with  him,  but  one  by  the 
union  with  the  flesh.  If,  however,  Ave  reject 
the  personal  union  as  impossible  or  unbe- 
coming, Ave  fall  into  the  error  of  speaking 
of  two  sons,  for  it  will  be  necessary  to  dis- 
tinguish, and  to  say,  that  he  avIio  Avas  prop- 
erly man  Avas  honoured  with  the  appella- 
tion of  Son,  and  that  he  who  is  properly  the 
Word  of  God,  has  by  nature  both  the  name 
and  the  reality  of  Sonship.  We  must  not, 
therefore,  divide  the  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
into  two  Sons.  Neither  will  it  at  all  avail 
J  to  a  sound  faith  to  hold,  as  some  do,  an 
j  union  of  persons  ;  for  the  Scripture  has  not 
said  that  the  Word  united  to  himself  the 
person  of  man,  but  that  he  Avas  made  flesh. 
This  expression,  hoAveATer,  "the  Word  Avas 
imade  flesh,"  can  mean  nothing  else  but 
I  that  he  partook  of  flesh  and  blood  like 
to  us ;  he  made  our  body  his  own,  and 
came  forth  man  from  a  Avoman,  not  casting 
off  his  existence  as  God,  or  his  generation 
of  God  the  Father,  but  even  in  taking  to 
himself  flesh  remaining  Avhat  he  was.  This 
the  declaration  of  the  correct  faith  pro- 
claims everywhere.  This  Avas  the  senti- 
ment of  the  holy  Fathers ;  therefore  they 
ventured  to  call  the  holy  Virgin,  the  Mother 
of  God,  not  as  if  the  nature  of  the  Word  or 
his  divinity  had  its  beginning  from  the  holy 
Virgin,  but  because  of  her  Avas  born  that 
holy  body  Avith  a  rational  soul,  to  Avhich  the 
Word  being  personally  united  is  said  to  be 
born  according  to  the  flesh.  These  things, 
therefore,  I  uoav  write  unto  }tou  for  the  loA'e 
of  Christ,  beseeching  you  as  a  brother,  and 
testifying  to  you  before  Christ  and  the 
elect  angels,  that  you  would  both  think  and 
teach  these  things  with  us,  that  the  peace 
of  the  Churches  may  be  preserved  and  the 
bond  of  concord  and  loATe  continue  unbrok- 


en amongst  the  Priests  of  God. 


EXTRACTS   FROM  THE  ACTS. 


SESSION  I.  (Continued). 
(Labbc  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  III.,  col.  462.) 


And  after  the  letter  was  read,  Cyril,  the 
bishop  of  Alexandria,  said  :  This  holy  and 
great  Synod  has  heard  what  I  wrote  to  the 
most  religious  Nestorius,  defending  the 
right  faith.  I  think  that  I  have  in  no  re- 
spect departed  from  the  true  statement  of 
the  faith,  that  is  from  the  creed  set  forth  by 
the  holy  and  great  synod  formerly  assem- 
bled at  Nice.  Wherefore  I  desire  your 
holiness  [i.e.  the  Council]  to  say  whether 
rightly  and  blamelessly  and  in  accordance 
with  that  holy  synod  I  have  written  these 
things  or  no. 

[A  number  of  bishops  then  gave  their 
opinion,  all  favourable  to  Cyril ;  after  these 
individual  opinions  the  Acts  continue  (col. 
491):] 

And  all  the  rest  of  the  bishops  in  the 
order  of  their  rank  deposed  to  the  same 
things,  and  so  believed,  according  as  the 
Fathers  had  set  forth,  and  as  the  Epistle  of 
the  most  holy  Archbishop  Cyril  to  Nes- 
torius the  bishop  declared. 

Palladius,  the  bishop  of  Amasea,  said, 
The  next  thing  to  be  done  is  to  read  the  let- 
ter of  the  most  reverend  Nestorius,  of 
which  the  most  religious  presbyter  Peter 
made  mention  ;  so  that  we  may  understand 
whether  or  no  it  agrees  with  the  exposition 
of  the  Nicene  fathers.     .     . 

And  after  this  letter  was  read,  Cyril,  the 
bishop  of  Alexandria,  said,  What  seems 
good  to  this  holy  and  great  synod  with  re- 
gard to  the  letter  just  read  ?     Does  it  also 


seem  to  be  consonant  to  the  faith  set  forth 
by  the  holy  Synod  assembled  in  the  city  of 
Nice  ? 

[The  bishops,  then  as  before,  individual!)/ 
express  their  opinion,  and  at  last  the  Acts 
continue  (col.  502)  :] 

All  the  bishops  cried  out  together : 
Whoever  does  not  anathematize  Nestorius 
let  him  be  anathema.  Such  an  one  the 
right  faith  anathematizes ;  such  an  one 
the  holy  Synod  anathematizes.  Whoever 
communicates  with  Nestorius  let  him  be 
anathema  !  We  anathematize  all  the  apos- 
tles of  Nestorius :  we  all  anathematize  Nes- 
torius as  a  heretic  :  let  all  such  as  commu- 
nicate with  Nestorius  be  anathema,  etc.,  etc. 

Juvenal,  the  bishop  of  Jerusalem  said : 
Let  the  letter  of  the  most  holy  and  rever- 
end Cselestine,  archbishop  of  the  Church  of 
Borne,  be  read,  which  he  wrote  concerning 
the  faith. 

[The  letter  of  Ccelesiine  teas  read  and  no 
opinion  expressed.] 

Peter  the  presbyter  of  Alexandria,  and 

'  primicerius  of  the  notaries  said  :  Altogether 

in  agreement  with  the  things  just  l'ead  are 

those  which   his  holiness  Cyril  our  most 

pious  bishop  wrote,  which  I  now  have  at 

1  hand,  and  will  read  if  }-our  piety  so  shall 

'  order. 

[The  letter  was  read  which  begins  thus  :] 

Tov  SooTr/pos  ijfiwv  Xeyovros  ivapycos,  k. 
t.  X. 

Cum  Salvator  noster,  etc. 


HISTORICAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  ST.   CYRILS  ANATHEMATISMS. 

There  has  been  some  difference  of  opinion  among  the  learned  as  to  whether  St.  Cyril's 
Synodal  letter  which  has  at  its  end  the  anathemas  against  Nestorius,  which  hereafter  follow, 
was  formally  approved  at  the  Council  of  Ephesus.  The  matter  is  one  only  of  archeological 
and  historical  interest,  for  from  a  theological  point  of  view  the  question  is  entirely  uninter- 
esting, since  there  is  no  possible  doubt  that  the  synod  endorsed  St.  Cyril's  teaching  and  for 
that  express  reason  proceeded  at  their  first  session  to  excommunicate  Nestorius.  Further 
there  is  no  one  that  disputes  that  the  anathematisms  were  received  at  the  next  General 
Council,  i.e.,  of  Chalcedon,  only  twenty  years  later,  and  that  Theodoret  was  condemned  by 
the  Fifth  Ecumenical  Council  because  he  wrote  against  these  very  Anathemas.     This  being 


200  EPHESUS.     A.D.  431 


the  case,  to  those  who  value  the  decrees  of  Ecumenical  Councils  because  of  their  ecumeni- 
cal character,  it  is  quite  immaterial  whether  these  anathematisms  were  received  aud  approved 
by  the  third  Council  or  no,  provided,  which  is  indisputably  the  case,  they  have  been  ap- 
proved by  some  one  council  of  ecumenical  authority,  so  as  to  become  thereby  part  and 
parcel  of  the  ecumenical  faith  of  the  Church. 

But  the  historical  question  is  one  of  some  interest,  and  I  shall  very  briefly  consider  it. 
We  have  indeed  the  "  Acta  "  of  this  council,  but  I  cannot  but  agree  with  the  very  learned 
Jesuit  Petavius  and  the  Gallican  Tillemont  in  thinking  them  in  a  very  unsatisfactory  con- 
dition. I  am  fully  aware  of  the  temerity  of  making  such  a  suggestion,  but  I  cannot  help 
feeling  that  in  the  remarks  of  the  Roman  representatives,  especially  in  those  of  the  presby- 
ter-legate, there  is  some  anachronism.  Be  this  as  it  may,  it  is  a  fact  that  the  Acts  do  not 
recite  that  this  letter  of  Cyril's  was  read,  nor  do  they  state  that  the  Anathemas  were  received. 
I  would  suggest,  however,  that  for  those  who  defend  John  of  Antioch,  and  criticise  the  action 
of  St.  Cyril,  it  is  the  height  of  inconsistency  to  deny  that  the  Council  adopted  the  Anathemas. 
If  it  was  the  bitterly  partisan  assembly  that  they  would  have  us  believe,  absolutely  under  the 
control  of  Cyril,  there  is  nothing  that,  a  priori,  they  would  have  been  more  sure  to  do  than 
adopt  the  Anathemas  which  were  universally  looked  upon  as  the  very  fulcrum  on  which  the 
whole  matter  turned. 

Bishop  Hefele  was  at  first  of  opinion  that  the  letter  was  merely  read,  being  led  to  this  con- 
clusion by  the  silence  of  the  Acts  with  regard  to  any  acceptance  of  it,  and  indeed  at  first 
wrote  on  that  side,  but  he  afterwards  saw  grounds  to  change  his  mind  and  expresses  them 
with  his  usual  clearness,  in  the  following  words  : 

(Hefele,  Hist,  of  Councils.  Vol.  III.,  p.  48,  note  2.) 
We  were  formerly  of  opinion  that  these  anathematisms  were  read  at  Ephesus,  but  not  ex- 
pressly confirmed,  as  there  is  hardly  anything  on  the  subject  in  the  Acts.  But  in  the  Fifth 
Ecumenical  Council  (collatio  vj.)  it  is  said  :  "The  holy  Council  at  Chalcedon  approved  this 
teaching  of  Cyril  of  blessed  memory,  and  received  his  Synodical  letters,  to  one  of  which  are 
appended  the  xij.  anathemas  "  (Mansi,  t.  ix.,  p.  341  ;  Hardouin,  t.  iij.,  p.  167).  If,  how- 
ever, the  anathematisms  of  Cyril  were  expressly  confirmed  at  Chalcedon,  there  was  even  more 
reason  for  doing  so  at  Ephesus.  And  Ibas,  in  his  welhknown  letter  to  Maris,  says  expressly 
that  the  Synod  of  Ephesus  confirmed  the  anathematisms  of  Cyril,  and  the  same  was 
asserted  even  by  the  bishops  of  Antioch  at  Ephesus  in  a  letter  to  the  Emperor. 

From  all  these  considerations  it  would  seem  that  Tillemont's1  conclusion  is  well  founded 
that  the  Synod  certainly  discussed  the  anathemas  of  Cyril  in  detail,  but  that  here,  as  in  many 
other  places,  there  are  parts  of  the  Acts  lacking.     I  shall  add  the  opinion  of  Petavius. 

(Petavius,  Be  Incarncdione,  Lib.  VI.,  cap.  xvij.) 
The  Acts  do  not  tell  us  what  judgment  the  Synod  of  Ephesus  gave  with  respect  to  the 
third  letter  of  Cyril,  and  with  regard  to  the  anathemas  attached  to  it.  But  the  Acts  in  other 
respects  also  have  not  come  down  to  us  in  their  integrity.  That  that  third  letter  was  re- 
ceived and  approved  by  the  Ephesine  Council  there  can  be  no  doubt,  and  this  the  Catho- 
lics shewed  in  their  dispute  with  the  Acephali  in  the  Collation  held  at  Constantinople  under 
the  Emperor  Justinian  in  the  year  of  Christ  811.  For  at  that  memorable  meeting  some- 
thing was  shewn  forth  concerning  this  letter  and  its  anathemas,  which  has  a  connexion  with 
the  matter  in  hand,  and  therefore  must  not  be  omitted.  At  that  meeting  the  Opposers,  that 
is  the  Acephali,  the  enemies  of  the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  made  this  objection  against  that 

>  Tillemont,  Meuioires.  Tom.  XIV.,  p.  405. 


EPHESUS.     A.D.  431 


201 


Council:  "The  [letter]  of  the  Twelve  Anathemas  which  is  inserted  in  the  holy  Council  of 
Ephesus,  and  which  you  cannot  deny  to  be  synodical,  why  did  not  Chalcedon  receive  it  ?  " 
etc.,  etc. 

From  this  it  is  evident  that  the  prevailing  opinion,  then  as  now,  was  that  the  Twelve  Anath- 
emas were  defined  as  part  of  the  faith  by  the  Council  of  Ephesus.  Perhaps  I  may  close 
this  treatment  of  the  subject  in  the  words  of  Denziger,  being  the  caption  he  gives  the  xij. 
Anathematisms  in  his  Enchiridion,  under  "Decrees  of  the  Third  Ecumenical  Council,  that  of 
Ephesus."  "  The  Third  Synod  received  these  anathematisms  ;  the  Fourth  Synod  placed  them 
in  its  Acts  and  styled  the  Epistles  of  Cyril  '  Canonical ' ;  the  Fifth  Synod  defended  them." 


THE    EPISTLE    OF  CYEIL  TO  NESTORIUS   WITH    THE  XII.  ANATHE- 
MATISMS. 

(Labbe  and   Cossart,    Concilia,  Tom.   III.,   col.  395;    Migne,   Pair.    Grcec,   Tom. 
LXXVII.  [Cyril,  Opera,  Tom.  X.],  col.  105  et  seqq.) 


To  the  most  reverend  and  God-loving 
fellow-minister  Nestorius,  Cyril  and  the 
synod  assembled  in  Alexandria,  of  the 
Egyptian  Province,  Greeting  in  the  Lord. 

When  our  Saviour  says,  clearly:  "He 
that  loveth  father  or  mother  more  than  me 
is  not  worthy  of  me  :  and  he  that  loveth  son 
or  daughter  more  than  me  is  not  worthy  of 
me,"  what  is  to  become  of  us,  from  whom 
your  Holiness  requires  that  we  love  you 
more  than  Christ  the  Saviour  of  us  all? 
Who  can  help  us  in  the  day  of  judgment,  or 
what  kind  of  excuse  shall  we  find  for  thus 
keeping  silence  so  long,  with  regard  to  the 
blasphemies  made  by  you  against  him  ? 
If  you  injured  yourself  alone,  by  teaching 
and  holding  such  things,  perhaps  it  would 
be  less  matter  ;  but  you  have  greatly  scan- 
dalized the  whole  Church,  and  have  cast 
among  the  people  the  leaven  of  a  strange 
and  new  heresy.  And  not  to  those  there 
[i.e.  at  Constantinople]  only;  but  also  to 
those  everywhere  [the  books  of  your  ex- 
planation were  sent].  Hoav  can  we  any 
longer,  under  these  circumstances,  make  a 
defence  for  our  silence,  or  how  shall  we  not 
be  forced  to  remember  that  Christ  said : 
"  Think  not  that  I  am  come  to  send  peace 
on  earth :  I  came  not  to  send  peace,  but  a 
sword.  For  I  am  come  to  set  a  man  at 
variance  against  his  father,  and  the  daugh- 
ter against  her  mother."  For  if  faith  be  in- 
jured, let  there  be  lost  the  honour  due  to 
parents,  as  stale  and  tottering,  let  even 
the  law  of  tender  love  towards  children 
and  brothers  be  silenced,  let  death  be  better 
to  the  pious  than  living  ;  "  that  they  might 
obtain  a  better  resurrection,"  as  it  is  written. 


Behold,  therefore,  how  we,  together  with 
the  holy  synod  which  met  in  great  Rome, 
presided  over  by  the  most  holy  and  most 
reverend  brother  and  fellow-minister,  Celes- 
tine  the  Bishop,  also  testify  by  this  third 
letter  to  you,  and  counsel  you  to  abstain 
from  these  mischievous  and  distorted  dog- 
mas, which  you  hold  and  teach,  and  to  re- 
ceive the  right  faith,  handed  down  to  the 
churches  from  the  beginning  through  the 
holy  Apostles  and  Evangelists,  who  "  were 
eye-witnesses,  and  ministers  of  the  Word." 
And  if  your  holiness  have  not  a  mind  to 
this  according  to  the  limits  defined  in  the 
writings  of  our  brother  of  blessed  memory 
and  most  reverend  fellow-minister  Celes- 
tine,  Bishop  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  be 
Avell  assured  then  that  you  have  no  lot  with 
us,  nor  place  or  standing  (Xoyov)  among  the 
priests  and  bishops  of  God.  For  it  is  not 
possible  for  us  to  overlook  the  churches 
thus  troubled,  and  the  people  scandalized, 
and  the  right  faith  set  aside,  and  the  sheep 
scattered  by  you,  who  ought  to  save  them,  if 
indeed  we  are  ourselves  adherents  of  the 
right  faith,  and  followers  of  the  devotion  of 
the  holy  fathers.  And  Ave  are  in  commun- 
ion with  all  those  laymen  and  clergymen 
cast  out  or  deposed  by  your  holiness  on 
account  of  the  faith ;  for  it  is  not  right  that 
those,  avIio  resolved  to  believe  rightly, 
should  suffer  by  your  choice ;  for  they  do 
Avell  in  opposing  you.  This  very  thing 
you  have  mentioned  in  your  epistle  Avritten 
to  our  most  holy  and  felloAV-bishop  Celes- 
tine  of  great  Rome. 

But  it  Avould  not  be  sufficient  for  your 
reverence  to  confess  with  us  only  the  sym- 


202 


EPHESUS.     A.D.  431 


bol  of  the  faith  set  out  some  time  ago  by 
the  Holy  Ghost  at  the  great  and  holy 
synod  convened  in  Nice :  for  you  have 
not  held  and  interpreted  it  right] y,  but 
rather  pervert  Aj ;  even  though  you  confess 
with  your  voice  the  form  of  words.  But 
in  addition,  in  writing  and  by  oath,  you 
must  confess  that  you  also  anathematize 
those  polluted  and  unholy  dogmas  of  yours, 
and  that  you  will  hold  and  teach  that  which 
we  all,  bishops,  teachers,  and  leaders  of  the 
people  both  East  and  West,  hold.  The 
holy  synod  of  Rome  and  we  all  agreed  on 
the  epistle  written  to  your  Holiness  from 
the  Alexandrian  Church  as  being  right  and 
blameless.  We  have  added  to  these  our 
own  letters  and  that  which  it  is  necessary 
for  you  to  hold  and  teach,  and  what  you 
should  be  careful  to  avoid.  Now  this  is 
the  Eaith  of  the  Catholic  and  Apostolic 
Church  to  which  all  Orthodox  Bishops, 
both  East  and  West,  agree : 

"We  believe  in  one  God,  the  Father 
Almighty,  Maker  of  all  things  visible  and 
invisible,  and  in  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the 
Only-begotten  Son  of  God,  begotten  of  his 
Father,  that  is,  of  the  substance  of  the 
Father ;  God  of  God,  Light  of  Light,  Very 
God  of  very  God,  begotten,  not  made,  be- 
ing of  one  substance  with  the  Father,  by 
whom  all  things  were  made,  both  those  in 
heaven  and  those  in  the  earth.  Who  for  us 
men  and  for  our  salvation,  came  down,  and 
was  incarnate,  and  Avas  made  man.  He 
suffered,  and  rose  again  the  third  day.  He 
ascended  into  the  heavens,  from  thence  he 
shall  come  to  judge  both  the  quick  and  the 
dead.  And  in  the  Holy  Ghost.  But  those 
that  say,  There  Avas  a  time  Avhen  he  A\ras 
not,  and,  before  he  was  begotten  he  Avas 
not,  and  that  he  Avas  made  of  that  Avhich 
previously  Avas  not,  or  that  he  A\ras  of  some 
other  substance  or  essence ;  and  that  the 
Son  of  God  Avas  capable  of  change  or  al- 
;  teration  ;  those  the  Catholic  and  Apostolic 
Church  anathematizes." 

FolloAving  in  all  points  the  confessions 
of  the  Holy  Fathers  Avhich  they  made  (the 
Holy  Ghost  speaking  in  them),  and  follow- 
ing the  scope  of  their  opinions,  and  going, 
as  it  Avere,  in  the  royal  Avay,  we  confess  that 
the  Only  begotten  Word  of  God,  begotten 
of  the  same  substance  of  the  Father,  True 
God  from  True  God,  Light  from  Light, 
through  Whom  all  things  were  made,  the 


things  in  heaven  and  the  things  in  the 
I  earth,  coming  doAvn  for  our  salvation,  mak- 
ing himself  of  no  reputation  (KaSeU  kavrbv 
eh  Kevcoaiv),  Avas  incarnate  and  made  man ; 
j  that  is,  taking  flesh  of  the  holy  Virgin,  and 
j  having  made  it  his  own  from  the  AAromb,  he 
subjected  himself  to  birth  for  us,  and  came 
forth  man  from  a  woman,  Avithout  casting 
j  off  that  which  he  Avas ;  but  although  he 
assumed  flesh  and  blood,  he  remained 
Avhat  he  Avas,  God  in  essence  and  in  truth. 
Neither  do  Ave  say  that  his  flesh  Avas 
changed  into  the  nature  of  divinity,  nor 
that  the  ineffable  nature  of  the  Word  of 
God  AA-as  laid  aside  for  the  nature  of  flesh  ; 
for  he  is  unchanged  and  absolutely  un- 
changeable, being  the  same  always,  accord- 
ing to  the  Scriptures.  For  although  visible 
and  a  child  in  SAvaddling  clothes,  and  even 
in  the  bosom  of  his  Virgin  Mother,  he  filled 
all  creation  as  God,  and  Avas  a  felloAAT-ruler 
with  him  avIio  begat  him,  for  the  Godhead 
is  without  quantity  and  dimension,  and  can- 
not have  limits. 

Confessing  the  Word  to  be  made  one 
with  the  flesh  according  to  substance,  Ave 
adore  one  Son  and  Lord  Jesus  Christ :  Ave 
do  not  divide  the  God  from  the  man,  nor 
separate  him  into  parts,  as  though  the  tAvo 
natures  were  mutualty  united  in  him  only 
through  a  sharing  of  dignity  and  authority 
(for  that  is  a  novelty  and  nothing  else), 
neither  do  Ave  give  separately  to  the  Word 
of  God  the  name  Christ  and  the  same 
name  separately  to  a  different  one  born  of 
a  Avoman ;  but  Ave  knoAv  only  one  Christ, 
the  Word  from  God  the  Father  with  his 
own  Flesh.  For  as  man  he  was  anointed 
with  us,  although  it  is  he  himself  who 
gives  the  Spirit  to  those  avIio  are  worthy 
and  not  in  measure,  according  to  the  saying 
of  the  blessed  EA'angelist  John. 

But  Ave  do  not  say  that  the  Word  of  God 
dwelt  in  him  as  in  a  common  man  born  of 
the  holy  Virgin,  lest  Christ  be  thought  of 
as  a  God-bearing  man ;  for  although  the 
Word  tabernacled  among  us,  it  is  also  said 
that  in  Christ  "  dwelt  all  the  fulness  of  the 
Godhead  bodily  "  ;  but  we  understand  that 
he  became  flesh,  not  just  as  he  is  said 
to  dAvell  in  the  saints,  but  Ave  define  that 
that  tabernacling  in  him  was  according  to 
equality  (Kara  tov  "crov  iv  avrco  rpoTrov)-. 
But  being  made  one  Kara  (pvaiv,1  and  not 
converted  into  flesh,  he  made  his  indwell- 


i  Vide  notes  on  this  expression. 


EPHESUS.    A.D.  431 


203 


iug  in  such  a  way,  as  Ave  may  say  that  the 
soul  of  man  does  in  his  own  body. 

One  therefore  is  Christ  both  Son  and 
Lord,  not  as  if  a  man  had  attained  only 
such  a  conjunction  with  God  as  consists  in 
a  unity1  of  dignity  alone  or  of  authority. 
For  it  is  not  equality  of  honour  which 
unites  natures ;  for  then  Peter  and  John, 
who  were  of  equal  honour  with  each  other, 
being  both  Apostles  and  holy  disciples 
[would  have  been  one,  and],  yet  the  two  are 
not  one.  Neither  do  we  understand  the 
manner  of  conjunction  to  be  apposition,  for 
this  does  not  suffice  for  natural  oneness 
(7rpo9  evcoaov  (pvai/crjv).  .Nor  yet  according 
to  relative  participation,  as  we  are  also 
joined  to  the  Lord,  as  it  is  written  "  we  are 
one  Spirit  in  him."  Rather  Ave  deprecate 
the  term  of  "junction"  {o-vvafyeias)  as  not 
having  sufficiently  signified  the  oneness. 
But  we  do  not  call  the  Word  of  God  the 
Father,  the  God  nor  the  Lord  of  Christ, 
lest  we  openly  cut  in  two  the  one  Christ, 
the  Son  and  Lord,  and  fall  under  the  charge 
of  blasphemy,  making  him  the  God  and 
Lord  of  himself.  For  the  Word  of  God, 
as  we  have  said  already,  was  made  hypo- 
statically  one  in  flesh,  yet  he  is  God  of  all 
and  he  rules  all ;  but  he  is  not  the  slave  of 
himself,  nor  his  own  Lord.  For  it  is  fool- 
ish, or  rather  impious,  to  think  or  teach 
thus.  For  he  said  that  God  was  his 
Father,  although  he  was  God  by  nature, 
and  of  his  substance.  Yet  we  are  not  ig- 
norant that  while  he  remained  God,  he 
also  became  man  and  subject  to  God,  ac- 
cording to  the  laAv  suitable  to  the  nature 
of  the  manhood.  But  how  could  he  become 
the  God  or  Lord  of  himself  ?  Conse- 
quently as  man,  and  with  regard  to  the 
measure  of  his  humiliation,  it  is  said  that 
he  is  equally  with  us  subject  to  God ;  thus 
he  became  under  the  Law,  although  as  God 
he  spake  the  Law  and  was  the  Law-giver. 

We  are  careful  also  how  we  say  about 
Christ:  "I  worship  the  One  clothed  on 
account  of  the  One  clothing  him,  and  on 
account  of  the  Unseen,  I  worship  the 
Seen."  It  is  horrible  to  say  in  this  con- 
nexion as  follows :  "  The  assumed  as  well 
as  the  assuming  have  the  name  of  God." 
For  the  saying  of  this  divides  again  Christ 
into  two,  and  puts  the  man  separately  by 
himself  and  God  also  by  himself.     For  this 


1  This  passage  is  very  difficult,  and  1  have  followed  the  Latin  in 
omitting  one  ©eric. 


saying  denies  openly  the  Unity  according 
to  which  one  is  not  worshipped  in  the 
other,  nor  does  God  exist  together  with  the 
other;  but  Jesus  Christ  is  considered  as 
One,  the  Only-begotten  Son,  to  be  honoiired 
with  one  adoration  together  with  his  own 
flesh. 

We  confess  that  he  is  the  Son,  begotten 
of  God  the  Father,  and  Only-begotten 
God ;  and  although  according  to  his  own 
nature  he  was  not  subject  to  suffering,  yet 
he  suffered  for  us  in  the  flesh  according  to 
the  Scriptures,  and  although  impassible, 
yet  in  his  Crucified  Body  he  made  his  own 
the  sufferings  of  his  own  flesh;  and  by  the 
grace  of  God  he  tasted  death  for  all :  he 
gave  his  own  Body  thereto,  although  he 
was  by  nature  himself  the  life  and  the  re- 
surrection, in  order  that,  having  trodden 
down  death  by  his  unspeakable  power,  first 
in  his  own  flesh,  he  might  become  the 
first  born  from  the  dead,  and  the  first-fruits 
of  them  that  slept.  And  that  he  might 
make  a  way  for  the  nature  of  man  to  attain 
incorruption,  by  the  grace  of  God  (as  Ave 
just  noAV  said),  he  tasted  death  for  every 
man,  and  after  three  days  rose  again,  having 
despoiled  hell.  So  although  it  is  said  that 
the  resurrection  of  the  dead  Avas  through 
man,  yet  Ave  understand  that  man  to  have 
been  the  Word  of  God,  and  the  poAver  of 
death  was  loosed  through  him,  and  he  shall 
come  in  the  fulness  of  time  as  the  One  Son 
and  Lord,  in  the  glory  of  the  Father,  in  or- 
der to  judge  the  Avorld  in  righteousness,  as 
it  is  written. 

We  will  necessarily  add  this  also.  Pro- 
claiming the  death,  according  to  the  flesh, 
of  the  Only-begotten  Son  of  God,  that  is 
Jesus  Christ,  confessing  his  resurrection 
from  the  dead,  and  his  ascension  into 
heaven,  we  offer  the  Unbloody  Sacrifice  in 
the  churches,  and  so  go  on  to  the  mystical 
thanksgivings,  and  are  sanctified,  having 
received  his  Holy  Flesh  and  the  Precious 
Blood  of  Christ  the  Saviour  of  us  all.  And 
not  as  common  flesh  do  we  receive  it ;  God 
forbid ;  nor  as  of  a  man  sanctified  and  as- 
sociated with  the  Word  according  to  the 
unity  of  worth,  or  as  having  a  divine  in- 
d welling,  but  as  truly  the  Life-giving  and 
very  flesh  of  the  Word  himself.  For  he  is 
the  Life  according  to  his  nature  as  God, 
and  AA'hen  he  became  united  to  his  Flesh, 
he  made  it  also  to  be  Life-giving,  as  also 
he  said  to  us :   Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto 


204 


EPIIESUS.     A.D.  431 


you,  Except  ye  eat  the  flesh  of  the  Son 
of  Man  and  drink  his  Blood.  For  we  must 
not  think  that  it  is  flesh  of  a  man  like  us  (for 
how  can  the  flesh  of  man  be  life-giving  by 
its  own  nature  ?)  but  as  having  become  tru- 
ly the  very  own  of  him  who  for  tis  both  be- 
came and  was  called  Son  of  Man.  Besides, 
what  the  Gospels  say  our  Saviour  said  of 
himself,  we  do  not  divide  between  two  hy- 
postases or  persons.  For  neither  is  he,  the 
one  and  only  Christ,  to  be  thought  of  as 
double,  although  of  two  (e«  Bvo)  and  they 
diverse,  yet  he  has  joined  them  in  an  indi- 
visible union,  just  as  everyone  knows  a  man 
is  not  double  although  made  up  of  soul  and 
body,  but  is  one  of  both.  Wherefore  when 
thinking  rightly,  we  transfer  the  human  and 
the  divine  to  the  same  person  (7rap'  ivbs 
elprjaSai). 

For  when  as  God  he  speaks  about  him- 
self: "He  who  hath  seen  me  hath  seen  the 
Father,"  and  "  I  and  my  Father  are  one," 
we  consider  his  ineffable  divine  nature 
according  to  which  he  is  One  with  his 
Father  through  the  identity  of  essence — 
"  The  image  and  impress  and  brightness  of 
his  glory."  But  when  not  scorning  the 
measure  of  his  humanity,  he  said  to  the 
Jews  :  "  But  now  ye  seek  to  kill  me,  a  man 
that  hath  told  you  the  truth."  Again  no 
less  than  before  we  recognize  that  he  is 
the  Word  of  God  from  his  identity  and  like- 
ness to  the  Father  and  from  the  circum- 
stances of  his  humanity.  For  if  it  is  neces- 
sary to  believe  that  being  by  nature  God,  he 
became  flesh,  that  is,  a  man  endowed  with 
a  reasonable  soul,  what  reason  can  certain 
ones  have  to  be  ashamed  of  this  language 
about  him,  which  is  suitable  to  him  as 
man?  For  if  he  should  reject  the  words 
suitable  to  him  as  man,  who  compelled  him 
to  become  man  like  us  ?  And  as  he  humbled 
himself  to  a  voluntary  abasement  (tcevaHriv) 
for  us,  for  what  cause  can  any  one  reject  the 
words  suitable  to  such  abasement  ?  There- 
fore all  the  words  which  are  read  in  the 
Gospels  are  to  be  applied  to  One  Person, 
to  One  hypostasis  of  the  Word  Incarnate. 
For  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  One,  accord- 
ing to  the  Scriptures,  although  he  is  called 
"  the  Apostle  and  High  Priest  of  our  pro- 
fession," as  offering  to  God  and  the  Father 
the  confession  of  faith  which  we  make  to 
him,  and  through  him  to  God  even  the  Fath- 
er and  also  to  the  Holy  Spirit ;  yet  we  say 
he  is,  according  to  nature,  the  Only-begot- 


ten of  God.     And  not  to  any  man  different 
from  him  do  we  assign  the  name  of  priest- 
hood,   and  the  thing,  for  he  became   "the 
Mediator  between  God   and   men,"   and  a 
Reconciler  unto  peace,  having  offered  him- 
self as  a  sweet  smelling  savour  to  God  and 
the  Father.     Therefore  also  he  said  :  "  Sac- 
rifice and  offering  thou  wouldest  not ;  but  a 
body  hast  thou  prepared  me :  In  burnt  offer- 
ings and  sacrifices  for  sin  thou  hast  had  no 
pleasure.     Then  said  I,  Lo,  I  come  (in  the 
volume  of  the  book  it  is  written  of  me)  to 
do  thy  will,  O  God."     For  on  account  of 
us  he  offered  his  body  as  a  sweet  smelling 
savour,  and  not  for  himself  ;  for  what  offer- 
ing or  sacrifice   was  needed   for    himself, 
who  as  God  existed  above  all  sins?     For 
"all  have  sinned  and  come  short  of  the 
glory  of  God,"  so  that  we  became  prone  to 
fall,  and  the  nature  of  man  has  fallen  into 
sin,  yet  not  so  he  (and  therefore  we   fall 
short  of  his  glory).     How  then  can  there 
be  further  doubt  that  the  true  Lamb  died 
for  us  and  on  our  account?    And  to  say 
that  he  offered  himself  for  himself  and  us, 
could  in  no  way  escape  the  charge  of  im- 
piety.    For  he  never  committed  a  fault  at 
I  all,  neither  did  he  sin.     What  offering  then 
j  did  he  need,  not  having  sin  for  which  sac- 
'  rifices  are  rightly  offered  ?     But  when  he 
,  spoke  about  the  Spirit,  he  said:  "He  shall 
[  glorify  me."   If  we  think  rightly,  we  do  not 
say  that  the  One  Christ  and  Son  as  needing 
glory  from  another  received  glory  from  the 
I  Holy  Spirit ;  for  neither  greater  than  he 
nor  above  him  is  his  Spirit,  but  because 
he  used  the  Holy  Spirit  to  show  forth  his 
'  own  divinity  in  his  mighty  works,  therefore 
!  he  is  said  to  have  been  glorified  by  him  just 
!  as  if  any  one  of  us  should  say  concerning 
his  inherent  strength  for   example,  or  his 
knowledge   of   anything,    "  They   glorified 
'  me."     For  although  the  Spirit  is  the  same 
|  essence,  yet  we  think  of  him  by  himself,  as 
he  is  the  Spirit  and  not  the  Son  ;  but  he  is 
not  different  from  him  ;  for  he  is  called  the 
Spirit  of  truth  and  Christ  is  the  Truth,  and 
he  is  sent  by  him,  just  as,  moreover,  he  is 
from  God  and  the  Father.     When  then  the 
Spirit  worked  miracles  through  the  hands 
of  the  holy  apostles  after  the  Ascension  of 
Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  into  heaven,  he  glo- 
rified him.     For  it  is  believed  that  he  who 
works  through  his  own  Spirit  is  God  ac- 
Therefore  he  said :  "  He 
mine,  and   shall   shew  it 


cording  to  nature. 


shall  receive   of 


EPHESUS.     A.D.  431 


205 


unto  yon."  But  we  do  not  say  this  as  if 
the  Spirit  is  wise  and  powerful  through 
some  sharing  with  another ;  for  he  is  all 
perfect  and  in  need  of  no  good  thing. 
Since,  therefore,  he  is  the  Spirit  of  the 
Power  and  Wisdom  of  the  Father  (that  is, 
of  the  Son),  he  is  evidently  Wisdom  and 
Power. 

And  since  the  holy  Virgin  brought  forth 
corporally  God  made  one  with  flesh  accord- 
ing to  nature,  for  this  reason  we  also  call 
her  Mother  of  God,  not  as  if  the  nature  of 
the  Word  had  the  beginning  of  its  existence 
from  the  flesh. 

For  "  In  the  beginning  was  the  Word, 
and  the  Word  was  God,  and  the  Word 
was  with  God,"  and  he  is  the  Maker  of  the 
ages,  coeternal  with  the  Father,  and  Crea- 
tor of  all;  but,  as  we  have  already  said, 
since  he  united  to  himself  hypostatically 
human  nature  from  her  womb,  also  he  sub- 
jected himself  to  birth  as  man,  not  as  need- 
ing necessarily  in  his  own  nature  birth  in 
time  and  in  these  last  times  of  the  world, 


but  in  order  that  he  might  bless  the  begin- 
ning of  our  existence,  and  that  that  which 
sent  the  earthly  bodies  of  our  whole  race  to 
death,  might  lose  its  power  for  the  future  by 
his  being  born  of  a  woman  in  the  flesh.  And 
this :  "  In  sorrow  thou  shalt  bring  forth 
children,"  being  removed  through  him,  he 
showed  the  truth  of  that  spoken  by  the 
prophet,  "  Strong  death  swallowed  them  up, 
and  again  God  hath  wiped  away  every  tear 
from  off  all  faces."  x  For  this  cause  also  we 
say  that  he  attended,  having  been  called, 
and  also  blessed,  the  marriage  in  Cana  of 
Galilee,  with  his  holy  Apostles  in  accordance 
with  the  economy.  We  have  been  taught 
to  hold  these  things  by  the  holy  Apostles 
and  Evangelists,  and  all  the  God-inspired 
Scriptures,  and  in  the  true  confessions  of 
the  blessed  Fathers. 

To  all  these  your  reverence  also  should 
agree,  and  give  heed,  without  any  guile. 
And  what  it  is  necessary  your  reverence 
should  anathematize  we  have  subjoined  to 
our  epistle.3 


i  There  is  a  most  curious  blunder  in  the  editing  of  this  Epistle 
in  Migne,  where  this  passage,  which  is  but  one  text,  viz.:  Isaiah 
xxv.  8,  is  made  into  two,  the  first  few  words  being  assigned  in 
the  margin  to  Hosea,  xiii.  14.  As  a  matter  of  fact  the  whole  sen- 
tence is  turned  into  nonsense  by  making  the  words  ko\  -rr&kiv  as  a 
connective  supplied  by  St.  Cyril.  What  the  text  really  says  is  that 
Death  prevailed  indeed,  but  God  wiped  away  again  the  tears  death 
had  caused.    The  same  error  is  found  in  the  letter  as  it  occurs  in 


Labbe  and  Cossart,  and  it  should  be  remarked  that  it  is  both  in 
the  Greek  and  Latin.  I  rather  suspect  that  St.  Cyril  had  a  purer 
text  of  the  LXX.  than  ours  which  read — "  And  he'hath  swallowed 
death  up  and  hath  wiped  away,  etc.,"  as  the  Vulgate  and  A.  V. 
read.  This  is  the  reading  the  context  certainly  seems  to  call  for. 
2  For  critical  notes  and  proposed  emendations  of  the  text,  see 
Eonth's  Scrivtorum  Eccles.  Opuscula.  Tom.  II.  (Ed.  III.), 
p.  IT. 


THE    XII.    ANATHEMATISMS    OF    ST.     CYRIL    AGAINST 

NESTORIUS. 

{Found  in  St.  Cyril's  Opera.     Migne,  Pat.  Grrsec,  Tom.  LXXVIL,  Col.  110;  and 
the  Concilia.) 


If  anyone  will  not  confess  that  the  Emmanuel  is  very  God,  and  that  therefore  the 
Holy  Virgin  is  the  Mother  of  God  (&6ot6ko<;),  inasmuch  as  in  the  flesh  she  bore  the 
Word  of  God  made  flesh  [as  it  is  written,  "  The  Word  was  made  flesh  "] :  let  him  be 
anathema. 

NOTES. 


THE  ANATHEMATISMS  OF   THE  HER- 
ETIC NESTORIUS   AGAINST  CYRIL. 

(Found  best  in  Migne' 8  edition  of  Murius 
Mercator.) 

I. 

If  anyone  says  that  the  Emmanuel  is  true 
God,  and  not  rather  God  with  us,  that  is,  that 
he  has  united  himself  to  a  like  nature  with 
ours,  which  he  assumed  from  the  Virgin  Mary, 
and  dwelt  in  it ;  and  if  anyone  calls  Mary  the 
mother  of  God  the  Word,  and  not  rather 
mother  of  him  who  is  Emmanuel ;  and  if  he 
maintains  that  God  the  Word  has  changed 
himself  into  the  flesh,  which  he  only  assumed 
in  order  to  make  his  Godhead  visible,  and  to 
be  found  in  form  as  a  man,  let  him  be  anath- 
ema. 

Petavius.1 

(Be  Incarnationc,  Lib.  vj.  cap.  xvij.) 

In  this  anathematism  certain  words  are 
found  in  the  Greek  copy  of  Dionysius  which 
are  lacking  in  the  ordinary  copies,  viz.  "  ac- 
cording as  it  is  written,  'And  the  Word  was 
made  flesh ' ;  "  unless  forsooth  Dionysius  sup- 
plied them  of  his  own  authority.  For  in 
the  Lateran  Synod  in  the  time  of  Martin  I. 
this  anathematism  was  quoted  without  the 
appended  words. 

This  anathematism  breaks  to  pieces  the 
chief  strength  of  the  Nestorian  impiety.  For 
it  sets  forth  two  facts.  The  one  that  the 
Emmanuel,  that  is  he  who  was  born  of  a  wom- 


an and  dwelt  with  us,  is  God :  the  other, 
that  Mary  who  bare  such  an  one  is  Mother  of 
God.  That  Christ  is  God  is  clearly  proved 
from  the  Nicene  Creed,  and  he  shews  that 
the  same  that  was  in  the  beginning  the  Son 
of  God,  afterwards  took  flesh  and  was  born 
of  Mary,  Avithout  any  change  or  confusion  of 
natures. 

St.  Cyril  explains  that  by  aapKiKws,  carnali- 
ter,  he  meant  nothing  else  than  Kara  o-apra,  se- 
cundum cam  cm,  "according  to  the  flesh."  And 
it  was  necessary  to  use  this  expression  to  over- 
throw the  perfidy  of  Nestorius  ;  so  that  we 
may  understand  that  the  most  holy  Virgin 
was  the  parent  not  of  a  simple  and  bare  man, 
but  of  God  the  Word,  not  in  that  he  was  God, 
but  in  that  he  had  taken  flesh.  For  God  the 
Father  was  the  parent  of  the  same  Son  ^eucws8 
(divinely)  as  his  mother  was  crup/aKius  (after  the 
flesh).  And  the  word  (o-ap/aKu>s)  in  no  degree 
lessens  the  dignity  of  his  begetting  and  bring- 
ing forth  ;  for  it  shews  that  his  flesh  was  not 
simulated  or  shadowed  forth ;  but  true  and 
like  to  ours.  Amphilochius  distinctly  uses 
the  word,  saying  "  Except  he  had  been  born 
carnally  (o-ap«u<uk),  never  wouldest  thou  have 
been  born  spiritually  (uretyiaTucSs)."  Cf.  St. 
Gregory  Nazianzen  (Orat.  51). 

Theodoret  misunderstood  St.  Cyril  to  teach 
in  this  first  anathematism  that  the  Word  was 
changed  into  the  flesh  he  assumed.  But 
Cyril  rightly  treated  this  whole  accusation  as 
a  foolish  calumny. 


EXCURSUS   ON  THE  WORD   ©eoro/cos. 

There  have  been  some  who  have  tried  to  reduce  all  the  great  theological  controversies  on 
the  Trinity  and  on  the  Incarnation  to  mere  logomachies,  and  have  jeered  at  those  who  could 
waste  their  time  and  energies  over  such  trivialities.     For  example,  it  has  been  said  that  the 


1  Petav'.us  gives  a  scholion  on  every  anathematism  and  a  resume 
of  the  Orientals'  objections  and  of  Theodorct's  criticisms,  with  j 
answers. 


2  This  is  a  late  form  of  flaws,  but  used  only  in  its  secondary 
sense. 


EPHESILS.     A.D.  431  207 


real  difference  between  Arius  and  Athanasius  was  nothing  more  nor  less  than  an  iota,  and 
that  even  Athanasius  himself,  in  his  more  placid,  and  therefore  presumably  more  rational 
moods,  was  willing  to  hold  communion  with  those  who  differed  from  him  and  who  still  re- 
jected the  homousion.  But  however  catching  and  brilliant  such  remarks  may  be,  they  lack 
all  solid  foundation  in  truth.  It  is  perfectly  manifest  that  a  person  so  entirely  lacking  in 
discrimination  as  not  to  see  the  enormous  difference  between  identity  and  likeness  is  not 
one  whose  opinion  on  such  a  point  can  be  of  much  value.  A  brilliant  historian  is  not  neces- 
sarily an  accurate  historian,  far  less  need  he  be  a  safe  guide  in  matters  of  theological  defini- 
tion.1 

A  similar  attempt  to  reduce  to  a  logomachy  the  difference  between  the  Catholic  faith  and 
Nestorianism  has  been  made  by  some  waiters  of  undoubted  learning  among  Protestants, 
notably  by  Fuchs  and  Schrockh.  But  as  in  the  case  of  the  homousios  so,  too,  in  the  case  of 
the  theotocos  the  word  expresses  a  great,  necessary,  and  fundamental  doctrine  of  the  Catholic 
faith.  It  is  not  a  matter  of  words,  but  of  things,  and  the  mind  most  unskilled  in  theology 
cannot  fail  to  grasp  the  enormous  difference  there  is  between  affirming,  as  does  Nestorian- 
ism, that  a  God  indwelt  a  man  with  a  human  personality  of  his  own  distinct  from  the  per- 
sonality of  the  indwelling  god  ;  and  that  God  assumed  to  himself  human  nature,  that  is  a 
human  body  and  a  human  soul,  but  without  human  personality. 

(Win.  Bright,  St.  Leo  on  the  Incarnation,  pp.  1G0,  161.) 

It  is,  then,  clear  that  the  question  raised  by  the  wide  circulation  of  the  discourses  of 
Nestorius  as  archbishop  of  Constantinople  was  hot  verbal,  but  vital.  Much  of  his  language 
was  irrelevant,  and  indicated  some  confusedness  of  thought  :  much  would,  of  itself,  admit 
of  an  orthodox  construction  ;  in  one  of  the  latest  of  his  sermons,  which  Gamier  dates  on 
Sunday,  December  14,  430,  he  grants  that  "Theotocos"  might  be  used  as  signifying  that 
"  the  temple  which  was  formed  in  Mary  by  the  Holy  Spirit  was  united  to  the  Godhead  ;  " 
but  it  was  impossible  not  to  ask  whether  by  "  the  temple  "  he  meant  the  body  of  Jesus,  or 
Jesus  himself  regarded  as  a  human  individual  existing  I8ia,  iSu<ws,  ova  fxipos— as  Cyril  repre- 
sents his  theory — and  whether  by  "  union  "  he  meant  more  than  a  close  alliance,  ejusdem 
generis,  in  the  last  analysis,  with  the  relation  between  God  and  every  saint,  or,  indeed,  every 
Christian  in  true  moral  fellowship  with  him — an  alliance  which  would  amount,  in  Cyril's 
phrase,  to  no  more  than  a  "  relative  union,"  and  would  reduce  the  Saviour  to  a  "Theophoros," 
the  title  claimed  of  old  by  one  of  his  chief  martyrs.  And  the  real  identity  of  Nestorius's 
view  with  that  of  Theodore  [of  Mopsuestia]  was  but  too  plainly  exhibited  by  such  state- 
ments as  occur  in  some  of  the  extracts  preserved  in  Cyril's  treatise  Against  Nestorius — to  the 
effect  that  Christ  was  one  with  the  Word  by  participation  in  dignity  ;  that  "  the  man"  was 
partaker  of  Divine  power,  and  in  that  sense  not  mere  man;  that  he  was  adored  together 
with  the  Word;  and  that ."  My  Lord  and  my  God"  was  a  doxology  to  the  Father;  and 
above  all,  by  the  words  spoken  at  Ephesus,  "I  can  never  allow  that  a  child  of  three  months 
old  was  God." 

It  is  no  part  of  my  duty  to  defend  the  truth  of  either  the  Catholic  or  Nestorian  propo- 
sition— each  has  found  many  adherents  in  most  ages  since  it  was  first  started,  and  probably 
what  is  virtually  Nestorianism  is  to-day  far  more  widely  held  among  persons  deemed  to 
be  orthodox  than  is"  commonly  supposed.  Be  this  as  it  may,  Nestorianism  is  clearly  subver- 
sive of  the  whole  Catholic  Doctrine  of  the  Incarnation,  and  therefore  the  importance  of 
the  word  ©eoro/cos  cannot  be  exaggerated. 

iCi.  Bp.  Li^htfoot's  criticism  on  Oibbon  as  an  historian,  The  |  land  will  of  course  instantly  present  itself  to  the  reader  as  a  sam- 
Apostolic  Fuuiers,  Vol.  I.,  p.  4G  n.    Macaulay's  History  of  Eng-  j  pie  of  the  brilliant  variety  of  histories  referred  to  in  the  test. 


208 


EPHESUS.     A.  P.  431 


I  shall  treat  the  -word  Theotocos  under  two  heads  ;  (l)Its  history  (2)  its  meaning,  first  how- 
ever quoting  Bp.  Pearson's  words  on  its  Conciliar  authority.  (Pearson,  Exp.  of  the  Creed, 
Art.  III.,  n.  37).  "It  is  plain  that  the  Council  of  Ephesus  which  condemned  Nestorius  con- 
firmed this  title  Ocotokos  ;  I  say  confirmed  it;  for  it  is  evident  that  it  was  before  used  in  the 
Church,  by  the  tumult  which  arose  at  the  first  denial  of  it  by  Anastasius  [Nestorius's  presby- 
ter] ;  and  so  confirmed  it  as  received  before,  because  they  approved  the  Epistles  of  St.  Cyril, 
who  proved  it  by  the  usage  of  those  Fathers  which  preceded  him." 


(1)  History  of  Word  ©coto'ko?. 

It  has  not  been  unfrequently  assumed  that  the  word  Theotocos  was  coined  to  express  the 
peculiar  view  of  the  Incarnation  held  by  St.  Cyril.  Such/however,  is  an  entire  mistake.  It  was 
an  old  term  of  Catholic  Theology,  and  the  very  word  was  used  by  bishop  Alexander  in  a  letter 
from  the  synod  held  at  Alexandria  in  a.d.  320,1  to  condemn  the  Arian  heresy  (more  than  a 
hundred  years  before  the  meeting  of  the  Council  of  Ephesus) ;  "  After  this,  we  receive  the  doc- 
trine of  the  resurrection  from  the  dead,  of  which  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord  became  the  first- 
fruits  ;  who  bore  a  body  in  truth,  not  in  semblance,  which  he  derived  from  Mary  the  Mother  of 
God  (ck  t*}s  ©eoroKov  Manias) . " 2  The  same  word  had  been  used  by  many  church  writers  among 
whom  may  be  mentioned  St.  Athanasius,  who  says,  "As  the  flesh  was  born  of  Mary,  the 
Mother  of  God,  so  we  say  that  he,  the  Word,  was  himself  born  of  Mary  "  (Orat.  c.  Arian.,  iij., 
14,  29,  33  ;  also  iv.,  32).  See  also  Eusebius  {Vit. Const.,  iij.,  43)  ;  St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  (Cat., 
x.,9);  and  especially  Origen,  who  (says  Bp.  Pearson)  "did  not  only  use,  but  expound  at 
large  the  meaning  of  that  title  ®6ot6kos  in  his  first  tome  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Bomans,  as 
Socrates  and  Liberatus  testify."  3  (Cf.  Origen  in  Dent,  xxii.,  23  ;  vol.  ij.,  p.  391.  A  ;  in  Luc. 
apud  Galland,  Bib.  Po.tr.,  vol.  xiv.,  append.,  p.  87,  D).  A  list  is  given  by  Dr.  Routh,  in  his 
Beliquice  Sacrce.  Vol.  ij.,  p.  215  (1st  Ed.),  332  (2d  Ed.). 

In  fact  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  was  the  first  to  object  to  it,  so  far  as  we  know,  writing 
as  follows  :  "Mary  bare  Jesus,  not  the  "Word,  for  the  Word  was  and  remained  omnipresent, 
although  from  the  beginning  he  dwelt  in  Jesus  in  a  peculiar  manner.  Thus  Mary  is  properly 
the  Mother  of  Christ  (Christotocos)  but  not  the  mother  of  God  (Theotocos).  Only  figura- 
tively, per  anaphoram,  can  she  be  called  Theotocos  also,  because  God  was  in  Christ  in  a  re- 
markable manner.  Properly  she  bare  a  man,  in  whom  the  union  with  the  Word  was  begun, 
but  was  still  so  little  completed,  that  he  was  not  yet  called  the  Son  of  God."  And  in  another 
place  he  says  :  "  It  is  madness  to  say  that  God  is  born  of  the  Virgin.  .  .  .  Not  God,  but 
the  temple  in  which  God  dwelt,  is  born  of  Mary."  '  How  far  Theodore  had  departed  from 
the  teaching  of  the  Apostolic  days  may  be  seen  by  the  following  quotations  from  St.  Igna- 
tius. "  There  is  one  only  physician,  of  flesh  and  spirit,  generate  and  ingenerate,  God  in 
man,  true  Life  in  death,  Son  of  Mary  and  of  God,  first  passible  and  then  impassible,  Jesus 
Christ  our  Lord."5  Further  on  in  the  same  epistle  he  says:  "For  our  God,  Jesus  the 
Christ,  was  borne  in  the  womb  by  Mary  etc."0  With  the  first  of  these  passages  Bp.  Light- 
foot  very  aptly  compares  the  following  from  Melito.  "Since  he  was  incorporeal,  he  fashioned 
a  body  for  himself  of  our  likeness  ...  he  was  carried  by  Mary  and  clothed  by  his 
Father,  he  trod  the  earth  and  he  filled  the  heavens."  7 

Theodore  was  forced  by  the  exigencies  of  his  position  to  deny  the  doctrine  of  the  com- 
manicatio  idiomatum  which  had  already  at  that  early  date  come  to  be  well  understood,  at 
least  so  far  as  practice  is  concerned. 


1  The  date  is  not  certain,  it  may  have  ueen  a  year  or  go  differ- 

-  Theod.,  Hist.  lied.,  I.,  4. 

s  Pearson,  An  Expos,  of  the  Creed,  Art.  III.,  n.  30, 


■'  I  take  this  passage  as  cited  by  Hefele,  Hist.  Counc,  Vol.  m.,  9. 
J  Iguat.,  Ad.  Eph.,  vii.  "  Ibid,  xviij. 

'  Me.ito,  Fragm,  14  (ed.  Otto) ;  cit.  Lightfoot,  Apost.  Fath.,  U., 
I  l,  p.  4S,  n. 


EPHESUS.     A.D.  431  209 


(Hefele,  Hist,  of  the  Councils,  Vol.  iii.,  p.  8.) 

This  doctrine,  as  is  well  known  is  predicating  the  same  properties  of  the  two  natures  in 
Christ,  not  in  abstracto  (Godhead  and  manhood),  but  in  concreto  (God  and  man).  Christ 
himself  had  declared  in  St.  John  iii.,  16:  "God  .  .  .  gave  his  only  begotten  Son" 
(namely,  to  death),  and  similarly  St.  Peter  declared  (Acts  iii.,  15)  :  "ye  .  .  .  killed  the 
Prince  of  Life,"  when  in  fact  the  being  given  up  and  being  killed  is  a  property  (tStto^a  =  pred- 
icate) of  man,  not  of  God  (the  only  begotten,  the  Prince  of  Life).  In  the  same  way  Clement 
of  Eome,  for  example,  spoke  of  "  the  sufferings  of  God  "  (jra9rjii.a.Ta  ®eov)  (1  Ad  Cor.  2),  Ignatius 
of  Antioch  {Ad  Ephes.,  c.  1,  and  Ad  Bom.,  6)  of  an  al/xa  and  tto.9os  ©eoi),  Tatian  of  a  ©eos 
irerrovSus  (Ad  Grcecos,  c.  13)  ;  Barnabas  teaches  (c.  7)  that  "  the  Son  of  God  could  not  suffer 
except  on  our  behalf  .  .  .  and  on  our  behalf  he  has  brought  the  vessel  of  his  Spirit  as 
a  sacrifice."  Similarly  Irenasus  (iii.,  16,  6)  says,  "  The  Only -begotten  impassible  Word  (uni- 
genitus  impassibilis)  has  become  passible"  (passibilis)  ;  and  Athanasius,  eVravpoi/xe^ov  elvai  ©e6v 
(Ep.  ad  Epictet.,  n.  10,  t.  j.,  p.  726.  ed.  Patav.) 

It  is,  however,  to  be  remarked  that  the  properties  of  the  one  nature  were  never  trans- 
ferred to  the  other  nature  in  itself,  but  always  to  the  Person  who  is  at  the  same  time  both 
man  and  God.  Human  attributes  were  not  ascribed  to  the  Godhead,  but  to  God,  and  vice 
versa. 

For  a  full  treatment  of  the  figure  of  speech  called  the  communicatio  idiomatum  the  reader 
is  referred  to  the  great  works  on  Theology  where  it  will  be  found  set  forth  at  large,  with  its 
restrictions  specified  and  with  examples  of  its  use.  A  brief  but  interesting  note  on  it  will 
be  found  in  St.  John  Damascene's  famous  treatise  De  Fide  Orthodoxa,  Book  III.,  iij.  (Migne's 
Pat.  Orosc,  col.  994). 

(2)  Meaning  of  the  Word  ©eoroKos. 

We  pass  now  to  the  meaning  of  the  word,  having  sufficiently  traced  the  history  of  its 
use.  Bishop  Pearson  says  :  "  This  name  was  first  in  use  in  the  Greek  Church,  who, 
delighting  in  the  happy  compositions  of  that  language,  called  the  blessed  Virgin  Theotocos. 
From  whence  the  Latins  in  imitation  styled  her  Virginem  Deiparam  et  Deigenitricem."1  In 
the  passage  to  which  the  words  just  quoted  are  a  portion  of  a  foot-note,  he  says  :  "Where- 
fore from  these  three,  a  true  conception,  nutrition,  and  parturition,  we  must  acknowledge 
that  the  blessed  Virgin  was  truly  and  properly  the  Mother  of  our  Saviour.  And  so  is  she 
frequently  styled  the  Mother  of  Jesus  in  the  language  of  the  Evangelists,  and  by  Elizabeth 
particularly  the  '  Mother  of  her  Lord,'  as  also  by  the  general  consent  of  the  Church 
(because  he  which  was  so  born  of  her  was  God,)  the  Deipara ;  which  being  a  compound  title 
begun  in  the  Greek  Church,  was  resolved  into  its  parts  by  the  Latins  and  so  the  Virgin  was 
plainly  named  the  Mother  of  God." 

Pearson  is  mistaken  in  supposing  that  the  resolution  of  the  compound  Theotocos  into 
t^-qrvp  tov  ®eov  was  unknown  to  the  early  Greek  writers.  Dionysius  expressly  calls  Mary 
17  {J.rp"t]p  tov  ®eoii  /xov  (Contr.  Paul.  Samos.,  Qusest.  viij.)  ;  and  among  the  Latins  Mater  Dei 
and  Dei  Genetrix  were  (as  Pearson  himself  confesses  in  note  37)  used  before  the  time  of  St. 
Leo  I.  It  is  not  an  open  question  whether  Mater  Dei,  Dei  Genetrix,  Deipara,  jxrjr-qp  tov  ®€ov 
are  proper  equivalents  for  ©cotokos.  This  point  has  been  settled  by  the  unvarying  use  of  the 
whole  Church  of  God  throughout  all  the  ages  from  that  day  to  this,  but  there  is,  or  at  least 
some  persons  have  thought  that  there  was,  some  question  as  to  how  Theotocos  should  be 
translated  into  English. 

Throughout  this  volume  I  have  translated  it  "  Mother  of  God,"  and  I  propose  giving  my 

1  Pearson,  An  Expos,  of  the  Creed,  Art.  III.,  n.  36. 
VOL.  XIV.  P 


210 


EPHESUS.     A.D.  431 


reasons  for  considering  this  the  only  accurate  translation  of  the  word,  both  from  a  lexico- 
graphical and  from  a  theological  point  of  view. 

(a)  It  is  evident  that  the  word  is  a  composite  formed  of  ©eds  =  God,  and  tLktuv  =  to  be 
the  mother  of  a  child.  Now  I  have  translated  the  verbal  part  "to  be  the  mother  of  a  child" 
because  "to  bear"  in  English  does  not  necessarily  carry  the  full  meaning  of  the  Greek 
word,  which  (as  Bp.  Pearson  has  well  remarked  in  the  passage  cited  above)  includes  "  con- 
ception, nutrition,  and  parturition."  It  has  been  suggested  that  "God-bearer"  is  an 
exact  translation.  To  this  I  object,  that  in  the  first  place  it  is  not  English ;  and  in  the 
second  that  it  would  be  an  equally  and,  to  my  mind,  more  accurate  translation  of  ©co^dpos 
than  of  ©eoTo'/cos. 

Another  suggestion  is  that  it  be  rendered  "  the  bringer  forth  of  God."  Again  I  object 
that,  from  a  rhetorical  standpoint,  the  expression  is  very  open  to  criticism ;  and  from  a 
lexicographical  point  of  view  it  is  entirely  inadequate,  for  while  indeed  the  parturition  does 
necessarily  involve  in  the  course  of  nature  the  previous  concejjtion  and  nutrition,  it  cer- 
tainly does  not  exjoress  it. 

Now  the  word  Mother  does  necessarily  express  all  three  of  these  when  used  in  relation 
to  her  child.  The  reader  will  remember  that  the  question  I  am  discussing  is  not  whether 
Mary  can  properly  be  called  the  Mother  of  God ;  this  Nestorius  denied  and  many  in  ancient 
and  modern  times  have  been  found  to  agree  with  him.  The  question  I  am  considering  is 
what  the  Greek  word  Theotocos  means  in  English.  I  do  not  think  anyone  would  hesitate  to 
translate  Nestorius's  Christotocos  by  "Mother  of  Christ"  and  surely  the  expressions  are 
identical  from  a  lexicographical  point  of  view. 

Liddell  and  Scott  in  their  Lexicon  insert  the  word  Scotokos  as  an  adjective  and  translate 
"bearing  God "  and  add  :  "  especially  rj  ©cord/cos,  Mother  of  God,  of  the  Virgin,  Eccl." 

(b)  It  only  remains  to  consider  whether  there  is  from  a  theological  point  of  view  any 
objection  to  the  translation,  "Mother of  God."  It  is  true  that  some  persons  have  thought 
that  such  a  rendering  implied  that  the  Godhead  has  its  origin  in  Mary,  but  this  was  the 
very  objection  which  Nestorius  and  his  followers  urged  against  the  word  Theotocos,  and  this 
being  the  case,  it  constitutes  a  strong  argument  in  favour  of  the  accuracy  of  the  rendering. 
Of  course  the  answer  to  the  objection  in  each  case  is  the  same,  it  is  not  of  the  Godhead 
that  Mary  is  the  Mother,  but  of  the  Incarnate  Son,  who  is  God.  "  Mother  "  expresses 
exactly  the  relation  to  the  incarnate  Son  which  St.  Cyril,  the  Council  of  Ephesus,  and  all 
succeeding,  not  to  say  also  preceding,  ages  of  Catholics,  rightly  or  wrongly,  ascribe  to 
Mary.  All  that  every  child  derives  from  its  Mother  that  God  the  Son  derived  from  Mary, 
and  this  without  the  co-operation  of  any  man,  but  by  the  direct  operation  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  so  that  in  a  fuller,  truer,  and  more  perfect  sense,  Mary  is  the  Mother  of  God  the  Son 
in  his  incarnation,  than  any  other  earthly  mother  is  of  her  son. 

I  therefore  consider  it  certain  that  no  scholar  who  can  and  will  divest  himself  of  theo- 
logical bias,  can  doubt  that  "  Mother  of  God  "  is  the  most  accurate  translation  of  the  term 
Theotocos. 

II. 

If  anyone  shall  not  confess  that  the  Word  of  God  the  Father  is  united  hypostatically 
to  flesh,  and  that  with  that  flesh  of  his  own,  he  is  one  only  Christ  both  God  and  man  at 
the  same  time  :  let  him  be  anathema. 

NOTES. 

Nestorius.  moved  from  one  place  to  another;  or  says 

n.  that  the  flesh  is  capable  of  receiving  the  di- 

If  any  one  asserts  that,  at  the  union  of  the  vine  nature,  and  that  it  has  been  partially 

Logos  with  the    flesh,   the    divine  Essence  united  with  the  flesh  ;  or  ascribes  to  the  flesh, 


EPHESUS.     A.D.  431 


211 


by  reason  of  its  reception  of  God,  an  exten- 
sion to  the  infinite  and  boundless,  and  says 


that  God  and  man  are  one  and  the  same  in 
nature ;  let  him  be  anathema. 


III. 

If  anyone  shall  after  the  [hypostatic]  union  divide  the  hypostases  in  the  one  Christ, 
joining  them  by  that  connexion  alone,  which  happens  according  to  worthiness,  or  even 
authority  and  power,  and  not  rather  by  a  coming  together  (avv68<p),  which  is  made  by 
natural  union  (evaxnv  <f)vcn/cr}v) :  let  him  be  anathema. 


NOTES. 


Nestokius. 
III. 


If  any  one  says  that  Christ,  who  is  also 
Emmanuel,  is  One,  not  [merely]  in  conse- 
quence of  connection,  but  [also]  in  nature,  and 
does  not  acknowledge  the  connection  (owafaia) 
of  the  two  natures,  that  of  the  Logos  and  of 
the  assumed  manhood,  in  one  Son,  as  still 
continuing  without  mingling  ;  let  him  be  an- 
athema. 

Hefele. 

{Hist,  of  the  Counc,  Vol.  III.,  p.  7.) 

Theodore  [of  Mopsuestia,  and  in  this  he 
was  followed  by  Nestorius,]  (and  here  is  his 
fundamental  error,)  not  merely  maintained 
the  existence  of  two  natures  in  Christ,  but  of 
two  persons,  as,  he  says  himself,  no  subsistence 
can  be  thought  of  as  perfect  without  person- 
ality. As  however,  he  did  not  ignore  the  fact 
that  the  consciousness  of  the  Church  rejected 
such  a  double  personality  in  Christ,  he  en- 
deavoured to  get  rid  of  the  difficulty,  and  he 
repeatedly  says  expressly  :  "  The  two  natures 
united  together  make  only  one  Person,  as 
man  and  wife  are  only  one  flesh.  ...  If 
we  consider  the  natures  in  their  distinction, 


we  should  define  the  nature  of  the  Logos  as 
perfect  and  complete,  and  so  also  his  Person, 
and  again  the  nature  and  the  person  of  the 
man  as  perfect  and  complete.  If,  on  the 
other  hand,  we  have  regard  to  the  union 
(awafaia),  we  say  it  is  one  Person."  The  very 
illustration  of  the  union  of  man  and  wife 
shows  that  Theodore  did  not  suppose  a  true 
union  of  the  two  natures  in  Christ,  but  that 
his  notion  was  rather  that  of  an  external  con- 
nection of  the  two.  The  expression  o-wa^eia, 
moreover,  which  he  selected  here  instead  of 
the  term  huxriv,  which  he  elsewhere  employs, 
being  derived  from  a-wair™  [to  join  together], 
expresses  only  an  external  connection,  a  fix- 
ing together,  and  is  therefore  expressly  re- 
jected in  later  times  by  the  doctors  of  the 
Church.  And  again,  Theodore  designates  a 
merely  external  connection  also  in  the  phrase 
already  quoted,  to  the  effect  that  "  the  Logos 
dwells  in  the  man  assumed  as  in  a  temple." 
As  a  temple  and  the  statue  set  up  within  it 
are  one  whole  merely  in  outward  appearance, 
so  the  Godhead  and  manhood  in  Christ  ap- 
pear only  from  without  in  their  actuality  as 
one  Person,  while  they  remain  essentially  two 
Persons. 


IV. 

If  anyone  shall  divide  between  two  persons  or  subsistences  those  expressions 
(c/jcova?)  which  are  contained  in  the  Evangelical  and  Apostolical  writings,  or  which  have 
been  said  concerning  Christ  by  the  Saints,  or  by  himself,  and  shall  apply  some  to  him 
as  to  a  man  separate  from  the  Word  of  God,  and  shall  apply  others  to  the  only  Word 
of  God  the  Father,  on  the  ground  that  they  are  fit  to  be  applied  to  God  :  let  him  be 
anathema. 

NOTES. 


Nestorius. 

IV. 

If  any  one  assigns  the  expressions  of  the 
Gospels  and  Apostolic  letters,  which  refer  to 
the  two  natures  of  Christ,  to  one  only  of  those 
natures,  and  even  ascribes  suffering  to  the 
divine  Word,  both  in  the  flesh  and  in  the 
Godhead  ;  let  him  be  anathema. 


St.  Cyril. 
(Apol.  contra  Orientales.) 
For  we  neither  teach  the  division  of  the 
hypostases  after  the  union,  nor  do  we  say 
that  the  nature  of  the  Deity  needs  increase 
and  growth  ;  but  this  rather  we  hold,  that 
by  way  of  an  economical  appropriation  {kot 
oketWtv  olKovofiLK-qv),   he    made   his   own  the 


P  2 


212 


EPHESUS.     A.D.  431 


properties  of  the  flesh,    as   having  become 
flesh. 

(Quod  unus  est  Ghristus.) 
For  the  wise  Evangelist,  introducing  the 
Word  as  become  flesh,  shows  him  economi- 
cally submitting  himself  to  his  own  flesh  and 
going  through  the  laws  of  his  own  nature. 
But  it  belongs  to  humanity  to  increase  in 
stature  and  in  wisdom,  and,  I  might  add,  in 
grace,  intelligence  keeping  pace  with  the 
measure  of  the  body,  and  differing  according 
to  age.  For  it  was  not  impossible  for  the 
Word  born  of  the  Father  to  have  raised  the 
body  united  to  himself  to  its  full  height  from 
the  very  swaddling-clothes.  I  would  say  also, 
that  in  the  babe  a  wonderful  wisdom  might 
easily  have  appeared.  But  that  would  have 
approached  the  thaumaturgical,  and  would 
have  been  incongruous  to  the  laws  of  the 
economy.  For  the  mystery  was  accomplished 
noiselessly.  Therefore  he  economically  al- 
lowed the  measures  of  humanity  to  have  power 
over  himself. 

A.  B.  Bruce. 

(The  Humiliation  of  Christ.  Appendix 
to  Lect.  II.) 

The  accommodation  to  the  laws  of  the 
economy,  according  to  this  passage,  consist- 
ed in  this — in  stature,  real  growth  ;  in  wisdom, 
apparent  growth.  The  wonderful  wisdom 
was  there  from  the  first,  but  it  was  not  al- 
lowed to  appear  (ex^vai),  to  avoid  an  aspect 
of  monstrosity. 

St.  Cyril. 
(Adversus  Nestorium.) 

Therefore  there  would  have  been  shown  to 
all  an  unwonted  and  strange  thing,  if,  being 
yet  an  infant,  he  had  made  a  demonstration 


of  his  wisdom  worthy  of  God  ;  but  expanding 
it  gradually  and  in  proportion  to  the  age  of 
the  body,  and  (in  this  gradual  manner)  mak- 
ing it  manifest  to  all,  he  might  be  said  to  in- 
crease (in  wisdom)  very  appropriately. 

(Ad  Eeginas  dc  recta  fide,  Orat.  II.,  cap.  xvi.) 

"But  the  boy  increased  and  waxed  strong 
in  spirit,  being  filled  with  wisdom,  and  the 
grace  of  God  was  upon  him."  And  again: 
"  Jesus  increased  in  stature  and  wisdom,  and 
in  favour  with  God  and  men."  In  affirming 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  to  be  one,  and  assign- 
ing to  him  both  divine  and  human  properties, 
we  truly  assert  that  it  was  congruous  to  the 
measures  of  the  kenosis,  on  the  one  hand,  that 
he  should  receive  bodily  increase  and  grow 
strong,  the  parts  of  the  body  gradually  at- 
taining their  full  development ;  and,  on  the 
other  hand,  that  he  should  seem  to  be  filled 
with  wisdom,  in  so  far  as  the  manifestation  of 
the  wisdom  dwelling  within  him  proceeded, 
as  by  addition,  most  congruously  to  the  stat- 
ure of  the  body ;  and  this,  as  I  said,  agreed 
with  the  economy  of  the  Incarnation,  and  the 
measures  of  the  state  of  humiliation. 

(Apol.  contra  Theod.,  ad  Anath.  iv.) 

And  if  he  is  one  and  the  same  in  virtue  of 
the  true  unity  of  natures,  and  is  not  one  and 
another  (two  persons)  disjunctively  and  parti- 
tively,  to  him  will  belong  both  to  know  and 
to  seem  not  to  know.  Therefore  he  knows  on 
the  divine  side  as  the  Wisdom  of  the  Father. 
But  since  he  subjected  himself  to  the  measure 
of  humanity,  he  economically  appropriates 
this  also  with  the  rest,  although,  as  I  said  a 
little  ago,  being  ignorant  of  nothing,  but 
knowing  all  things  with  the  Father. 


V. 

If  anyone  shall  dare  to  say  that  the  Christ  is  a  Theophorus  [that  is,  God-bearing] 
^an  and  not  rather  that  he  is  very  God,  as  an  only  Son  through  nature,  because  "  the 
Word  was  made  flesh,"  and  "  hath  a  share  in  flesh  and  blood  as  we  do  : "  let  him  be 
anathema. 

NOTES. 


man 


Nestorius. 

v. 

If  any  one  ventures  to  say  that,  even  after 
the  assumption  of  human  nature,  there  is  only 
one  Son  of  God,  namely,  he  who  is  so  in  nat- 
ure (naturaliter  filius  =  Logos),  while  he 
(since  the  assumption  of  the  flesh)  is  certainly 
Emmanuel :  let  him  be  anathema. 


Petavius. 

It  is  manifest  that  this  anathematism  is  di- 
rected against  the  blasphemy  of  Nestorius,  by 
which  he  said  that  Christ  was  in  this  sense 
Emmanuel,  that  a  man  was  united  and  asso- 
ciated with  God,  just  as  God  had  been  said 
to  have  been  with  the  Prophets  and  other 
holy  men,  and  to  have  had  his  abode  in  them ; 


EPHESUS.     A.D.  431 


213 


so  that  they  were  properly  styled  Oeo^o'pot,  be- 
cause, as  it  were,  they  carried  God  about  with 
them  ;  but  there  was  no  one  made  of  the  two. 
But  he  held  that  our  Lord  as  man  was  bound 
and  united  with  God  only  by  a  communion  of 
dignity. 

Nestorius  [in  his  Counter  Anathematism] 
displays  the  hidden  meaning  of  his  heresy, 
when  he  says,  that  the  Son  of  God  is  not  one 
after  the  assumption  of  the  humanity  ;  for  he 
who  denied  that  he  was  one,  no  doubt  thought 
that  he  was  two. 

Theodoret  in  his  criticism  of  this  Anathe- 
matism remarks  that  many  of  the  Ancients, 


including  St.  Basil  had  used  this  very  word, 
©eo<£opo?,  for  the  Lord  ;  but  the  objection  has 
no  real  foundation,  for  the  orthodoxy  or  het- 
erodoxy of  such  a  word  must  be  determined 
by  the  context  in  which  it  is  used,  and  also  by 
the  known  opinions  of  him  that  uses  it.  Ex- 
pressions which  are  in  a  loose  sense  orthodox 
and  quite  excusable  before  a  heresy  arises, 
may  become  afterwards  the  very  distinctive 
marks  and  shibboleths  of  error.  Petavius  has 
pointed  out  how  far  from  orthodox  many  of  the 
earliest  Christian  writers  were,  at  least  verbal- 
ly, and  Bp.  Bull  defended  them  by  the  same 
line  of  argument  I  have  just  used  and  which  Pe- 
tavius himself  employs  in  this  very  connection. 


VI. 

If  anyone  shall  dare  say  that  the  Word  of  God  the  Father  is  the  God  of  Christ  or 
the  Lord  of  Christ,  and  shall  not  rather  confess  him  as  at  the  same  time  both  God  and 
Man,  since  according  to  the  Scriptures,  "The  Word  was  made  flesh"  :  let  him  be  anath- 
ema. 

NOTES. 
Nestorius.  Petavius. 


VI. 

If  anyone,  after  the  Incarnation  calls  an- 
other than  Christ  the  Word,  and  ventures  to 
say  that  the  form  of  a  servant  is  equally  with 
the  Word  of  God,  without  beginning  and  un- 
created, and  not  rather  that  it  is  made  by  him 
as  its  natural  Lord  and  Creator  and  God,  and 
that  he  has  promised  to  raise  it  again  in  the 
words:  "Destroy  this  temple,  and  in  three 
days  I  will  build  it  up  again "  ;  let  him  be 
anathema. 

Hepele. 

This  [statement  of  Nestorius's  that  any 
should  call  "  another  than  Christ  the  Word  "] 
has  no  reference  to  Cyril ;  but  is  a  hyper-Nes- 
torianism,  which  Nestorius  here  rejects.  This 
[that  "  the  form  of  a  servant  is  without  begin- 
ning and  uncreated  "]  was  asserted  by  some 
Apollinarists  ;  and  Nestorius  accused  St.  Cyril 
of  Apollinarianism . 


As  Nestorius  believed  that  in  Christ  there 
were  two  distinct  entities  (re  ipsa  duos)  that  is 
to  say  two  persons  joined  together ;  it  was 
natural  that  he  should  hold  that  the  Word  was 
the  God  and  Lord  of  the  other,  that  is  of  the 
man.  Cyril  contradicts  this,  and  since  he 
taught  that  there  was,  not  two,  but  one  of 
two  natures,  that  is  one  person  or  suppositum, 
therefore  he  denied  that  the  Word  was  the 
God  or  Lord  of  the  man  ;  since  no  one  should 
be  called  the  Lord  of  himself. 

Theodoret  in  his  answer  shuffles  as  usual, 
and  points  out  that  Christ  is  styled  a  servant 
by  the  Prophet  Isaiah,  because  of  the  form  of 
a  servant  which  he  had  received.  But  to  this 
Cyril  answers  ;  that  although  Christ,  inasmuch 
as  he  was  man,  is  called  the  servant  of  the 
Father,  as  of  a  person  distinct  from  himself  ; 
yet  he  denies  that  the  same  person  can  be  his 
own  lord  or  servant,  lest  a  separation  of  the 
person  be  introduced. 


VII. 

If  anyone  shall  say  that  Jesus  as  man  is  only  energized  by  the  Word  of  God,  and 
that  the  glory  of  the  Only-begotten  is  attributed  to  him  as  something  not  properly  his : 
let  him  be  anathema. 

NOTES. 


Nestorius. 


vii. 


morning  star  was  (Ps.  cix.,  3) 1,  and  does  not 
rather  confess  that  he  has  obtained  the  desig- 


1  The  editor  of  the  English  translation  to  this  reference  adds 

Tf  flnvnne  ciflvc;  that  flip  rnin  wlin  wfl<?  fnrmprl  !  the  following  note  :  "  This  is  the  reference  in  the  original ;  but  the 
j.i  any  one  sa)  s  tnat  tne  man  wno  was  ioi mea   editor  is  unatble  t0  say  t0  wnat  ;t  refers."  (!)  (Hefele,  Hist,  of  the 

Of  the  Virgin  is  the  Only-bcqottCn,  wllO  was  born  !  Councils,  Vol.  III.,  p.  36,  n.  3.)   "  Ex  utero  ante  Luciferum  genu! 
r  _        x-u      r.  j!    j.i        ti  ii  i     j?  n        te,"  the  third  verse  of  the  Psalm  Dixit  Dominus,  cix.,  by  the 

from  the  bosom  of   the   Father,  before   the !  Hebrew  numbering  ex. 


2U 


EPHESUS.    A.D.  431 


nation  of  Only-begotten  on  account  of  his  con- 
nection with  him  who  in  nature  is  the  Only- 
begotten  of  the  Father ;  and  besides,  if  any 
one  calls  another  than  the  Emmanuel  Christ ; 
let  him  be  anathema. 

St.  Cyril. 
(Declaratio  Septima.) 

When  the  blessed  Gabriel  announced  to  the 
holy  Virgin  the  generation  of  the  only-begot- 
ten Son  of  God  according  to  the  flesh,  he  said, 
"  Thou  shalt  bear  a  son ;  and  thou  shalt  call 
his  name  Jesus,  for  he  shall  save  his  people 
from  their  sins."  But  he  was  named  also 
Christ,  because  that  according  to  his  human 
nature  he  was  anointed  with  us,  according  to 
the  words  of  the  Psalmist:  "Thou  hast  loved 
righteousness  and  hated  iniquity :  therefore 
God,  even  thy  God  hath  anointed  thee  with 
the  oil  of  gladness  above  thy  fellows."    For 


although  he  was  the  giver  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
neither  did  he  give  it  by  measure  to  them  that 
were  worthy  (for  he  was  full  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  and  of  his  fulness  have  we  all  received, 
as  it  is  written),  nevertheless  as  he  is  man  he 
was  called  anointed  economically,  the  Holy 
Spirit  resting  upon  him  spiritually  (vo-qrtLi)  and 
not  after  the  manner  of  men,  in  order  that  he 
might  abide  in  us,  although  he  had  been  driven 
forth  from  us  in  the  beginning  by  Adam's  fall. 
He  therefore  the  only  begotten  Word  of  God 
made  flesh  was  called  Christ.  And  since  he 
possessed  as  his  own  the  power  proper  to  God, 
he  wrought  his  wonders.  Whosoever  there- 
fore shall  say  that  the  glory  of  the  Only-be- 
gotten was  added  to  the  power  of  Christ,  as 
though  the  Only-begotten  was  different  from 
Christ,  they  are  thinking  of  two  sons ;  the  one 
truly  working  and  the  other  impelled  (by  the 
strength  of  another,  Lot.)  as  a  man  like  to  us  ; 
and  all  such  fall  under  the  penalty  of  this 
anathematism. 


VIII. 

If  anyone  shall  dare  to  say  that  the  assumed  man  (ava\r)$&evTa)  ought  to  be  wor- 
shipped together  with  God  the  Word,  and  glorified  together  with  him,  and  recognised 
together  with  him  as  God,  and  yet  as  two  different  things,  the  one  with  the  other  (for 
this  "  Together  with  "  is  added  [i.  e.,  by  the  Nestorians]  to  convey  this  meaning) ;  and 
shall  not  rather  with  one  adoration  worship  the  Emmanuel  and  pay  to  him  one  glorifi- 
cation, as  [it  is  written]  "The  Word  was  made  flesh"  :  let  him  be  anathema. 


NOTES. 


Nestoeius. 

VIII. 


If  any  one  says  that  the  form  of  a  servant 
should,  for  its  own  sake,  that  is,  in  reference 
to  its  own  nature,  be  reverenced,  and  that  it 
is  the  ruler  of  all  things,  and  not  rather  that 
[merely]  on  account  of  its  connection  with 
the  holy  and  in  itself  universally-ruling  nat- 
ure of  the  Only-begotten,  it  is  to  be  rever- 
enced ;  let  him  be  anathema. 

Hefele. 

On  this  point  [made  by  Nestorius,  that 
"the  form  of  a  servant  is  the  ruler  of  all 
things "]  Marius  Mercator  has  already  re- 
marked with  justice,  that  no  Catholic  had  ever 
asserted  anything  of  the  kind. 


Petavius  notes  that  the  version  of  Diony- 
sius  Exiguus  is  defective. 

Petavius. 

Nestorius  captiously  and  maliciously  inter- 
preted this  as  if  the  "form  of  a  servant" 
according  to  its  very  nature  (ratio)  was  to  be 
adored,  that  is  should  receive  divine  worship. 
But  this  is  nefarious  and  far  removed  from 
the  mind  of  Cyril.  Since  to  such  an  extent 
only  the  human  nature  of  Christ  is  one  sup- 
positum  with  the  divine,  that  he  declares  that 
each  is  the  object  of  one  and  an  undivided 
adoration  ;  lest  if  a  double  and  dissimilar 
cultus  be  attributed  to  each  one,  the  divine 
person  should  be  divided  into  two  adorable 
Sons  and  Christs,  as  we  have  heard  Cyril 
often  complaining. 


IX. 

If  any  man  shall  say  that  the  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ  was  glorified  by  the  Holy 
Ghost,  so  that  he  used  through  him  a  power  not  his  own  and  from  him  received  power 
against  unclean  spirits  and  power  to  work  miracles  before  men  and  shall  not  rather  con- 


EPHEStTS.     A.D.  431 


215 


fess  that  it  was  his  own  Spirit  through  which  he  worked  these  divine  signs ;  let  him  be 
anathema. 

NOTES. 


Nestobius. 

IX. 

If  anyone  says  that  the  form  of  a  servant 
is  of  like  nature  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  not 
rather  that  it  owes  its  union  with  the  Word 
which  has  existed  since  the  conception,  to 
his  mediation,  by  which  it  works  miraculous 
healings  among  men,  and  possesses  the  power 
of  expelling  demons  ;  let  him  be  anathema. 

Petavius. 
The  scope  of  this  anathematism  is  to  shew 
that  the  Word  of  God,  when  he  assumed 
flesh  remaining  what  he  was,  and  lacking 
nothing  which  the  Father  possessed  except 
only  paternity,  had  as  his  own  the  Holy 
Spirit  which  is  from  him  and  substantially 
abides  in  him.  Prom  this  it  follows  that 
through  him,  as  through  a  power  and  strength 
which  was  his  own,  and  not  one  alien  or 
adventitious,  he  wrought  his  wonders  and 
cast  forth  devils,  but  he  did  not  receive  that 
Holy  Spirit  and  his  power  as  formerly  the 


Prophets    had  done,    or    as   afterwards    his 
disciples  did,  as  a  kind  of  gift  (beneficii  loco). 

The  Orientals  objected  that  St.  Cyril  here 
contradicts  himself,  for  here  he  says  that 
Christ  did  not  work  his  wonders  by  the  Holy 
Ghost  and  in  another  place  he  frankly  con- 
fesses that  he  did  so  work  them.  But  the 
whole  point  is  what  is  intended  by  working 
through  the  Holy  Ghost.  For  the  Apostles 
worked  miracles  through  the  Holy  Ghost  but 
as  by  a  power  external  to  themselves,  but 
not  so  Christ.  When  Christ  worked  wonders 
through  the  Holy  Ghost,  he  was  working 
through  a  power  which  was  his  own,  viz. :  the 
Third  Person  of  the  Holy  Trinity ;  from 
whom  he  never  was  and  never  could  be  sepa- 
rated, ever  abiding  with  him  and  the  Eternal 
Father  in  the  Divine  Unity. 

The  Westerns  have  always  pointed  to 
this  anathematism  as  shewing  that  St.  Cyril 
recognized  the  eternal  relation  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  as  being  from  the  Son, 


EXCURSUS  ON  HOW  OUE  LORD  WORKED  MIRACLES. 

In  view  of  the  fact  that  many  are  now  presenting  as  if  something  newly  discovered,  and 
as  the  latest  results  of  biblical  study,  the  interpretations  of  the  early  heretics  with  regard  to 
our  Lord's  powers  and  to  his  relation  to  the  Holy  Ghost,  I  have  here  set  down  in  full  Theo- 
doret's  Counter-statement  to  the  faith  accepted  by  the  Ecumenical  Councils  of  the  Church. 

Theodoeet. 
(Counter  Statement  to  Anatli.  IX.  of  Cyril.) 
Here  he  has  plainly  had  the  hardihood  to  anathematize  not  only  those  who  at  the  present 
time  hold  pious  opinions,  but  also  those  who  were  in  former  days  heralds  of  truth  ;  aye  even 
the  writers  of  the  divine  Gospels,  the  band  of  the  holy  Apostles,  and,  in  addition  to  these, 
Gabriel  the  archangel.  For  he  indeed  it  was  who  first,  even  before  the  conception,  an- 
nounced the  birth  of  the  Christ  according  to  the  flesh ;  saying  in  reply  to  Mary  when  she 
asked,  "  How  shall  this  be,  seeing  I  know  not  a  man  ?  "  "  The  Holy  Ghost  shall  come 
upon  thee  and  the  power  of  the  Highest  shall  overshadow  thee  ;  therefore  also  that  holy 
thing  that  shall  be  born  of  thee  shall  be  called  the  Son  of  God."  And  to  Joseph  he  said, 
"Fear  not  to  take  unto  thee  Mary  thy  wife,  for  that  which  is  conceived  in  her  is  of  the 
Holy  Ghost."  And  the  Evangelist  says,  "When  as  his  mother  Mary  was  espoused  to  Joseph 
.  .  .  she  was  found  with  child  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  And  the  Lord  himself  when  he  had 
come  into  the  synagogue  of  the  Jews  and  had  taken  the  prophet  Isaiah,  after  reading  the 
passage  in  which  he  says,  "The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  is  upon  me  because  he  hath  anointed  me" 
and  so  on,  added,  "  This  day  is  this  scripture  fulfilled  in  your  ears."  And  the  blessed  Peter 
in  his  sermon  to  the  Jews  said,  "  God  anointed  Jesus  of  Nazareth  with  the  Holy  Ghost." 
And  Isaiah  many  ages  before  had  predicted  "There  shall"  come  forth  a  rod  out  of  the  stem 


216  EPHESUS.     A.D.  431 


of  Jesse,  and  a  branch  shall  grow  out  of  his  roots  ;  and  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  shall  rest  upon 
him,  the  spirit  of  wisdom  and  understanding,  the  spirit  of  counsel  and  might,  the  spirit  of 
knowledge  and  of  the  fear  of  the  Lord"  ;  and  again,  "Behold  my  servant  whom  I  uphold,  my 
beloved  in  whom  my  soul  delighteth.  I  will  put  my  Spirit  upon  him  :  he  shall  bring  forth 
judgment  to  the  Gentiles."  This  testimony  the  Evangelist  too  has  inserted  in  his  own 
writings.  And  the  Lord  himself  in  the  Gospels  says  to  the  Jews,  "  If  I  with  the  Spirit  of 
God  cast  out  devils,  no  doubt  the  kingdom  of  God  is  come  upon  you."  And  John  says,  "  He 
that  sent  me  to  baptize  with  water,  the  same  said  unto  me,  Upon  whom  thou  shalt  see  the 
Spirit  descending  and  remaining  on  him,  the  same  is  he  which  baptizeth  with  the  Holy  Ghost." 
So  this  exact  examiner  of  the  divine  decrees  has  not  only  anathematized  prophets,  apostles, 
and  even  the  archangel  Gabriel,  but  has  suffered  his  blasphemy  to  reach  even  the  Saviour  of 
the  world  himself.  For  we  have  shewn  that  the  Lord  himself  after  reading  the  passage  "The 
Spirit  of  the  Lord  is  upon  me  because  he  had  anointed  me,"  said  to  the  Jews,  "This  day  is 
this  scripture  fulfilled  in  your  ears."  And  to  those  who  said  that  he  was  casting  out  devils 
by  Beelzebub  he  replied  that  he  was  casting  them  out  by  the  Spirit  of  God.  But  we  main- 
tain that  it  was  not  God  the  Word,  of  one  substance  and  co-eternal  with  the  Father,  that 
was  formed  by  the  Holy  Ghost  and  anointed,  but  the  human  nature  which  was  assumed  by 
him  at  the  end  of  days.  We  shall  confess  that  the  Spirit  of  the  Son  was  his  own  if  he  spoke 
of  it  as  of  the  same  nature  and  proceeding  from  the  Father,  and  shall  accept  the  expression 
as  consistent  with  true  piety.  But  if  he  speaks  of  the  Spirit  as  being  of  the  Son,  or  as  hav- 
ing its  origin  through  the  Son  we  shall  reject  this  statement  as  blasphemous  and  impious. 
For  Ave  believe  the  Lord  when  he  says,  "The  spirit  which proceedeth  from  the  Father  "  ;  and 
likewise  the  very  divine  Paul  saying,  "  We  have  received  not  the  spirit  of  the  world,  but  the 
spirit  which  is  of  God." 

In  the  foregoing  will  be  found  the  very  same  arguments  used  and  the  same  texts  cited 
against  the  Catholic  faith  as  are  urged  and  cited  by  the  Kev.  A.  J.  Mason.  The  Conditions  of 
Our  Lord's  Life  on  Earth,  and  by  several  other  recent  writers. 


Whosoever  shall  say  that  it  is  not  the  divine  Word  himself,  when  he  was  made  flesh 
and  had  become  man  as  we  are,  but  another  than  he,  a  man  born  of  a  woman,  yet  dif- 
ferent from  him  (t'St/cco?  avSpcoTrov),  who  is  become  our  Great  High  Priest  and  Apostle  ;  or 
if  any  man  shall  say  that  he  offered  himself  in  sacrifice  for  himself  and  not  rather  for  us, 
whereas,  being  without  sin,  he  had  no  need  of  offering  or  sacrifice  :  let  him  be  anathema. 


NOTES. 


Nestorius. 

X. 


If  any  one  maintains  that  the  Word,  who  is 
from  the  beginning,  has  become  the  high  priest 
and  apostle  of  our  confession,  and  has  offered 
himself  for  us,  and  does  not  rather  say  that  it 
is  the  work  of  Emmanuel  to  be  an  apostle  ; 
and  if  any  one  in  such  a  manner  divides  the 
sacrifice  between  him  who  united  [the  Word] 
and  him  who  was  united  [the  manhood]  refer- 
ring it  to  a  common  sonship,  that  is,  not  giving 
to  God  that  which  is  God's,  and  to  man  that 
which  is  man's ;  let  him  be  anathema. 


St.  Cyril. 

(Dcdaratio  decima. ) 

But  I  do  not  know  how  those  who  think 
otherwise  contend  that  the  very  Word  of  God 
made  man,  was  not  the  apostle  and  high-priest 
of  our  profession,  but  a  man  different  from 
him  ;  who  was  born  of  the  holy  Virgin,  was 
called  our  apostle  and  high-jDriest,  and  came 
to  this  gradually  ;  and  that  not  only  for  us  did 
he  offer  himself  a  sacrifice  to  God  and  the 
Father,  but  also  for  himself.  A  statement 
which  is  wholly  contrary  to  the  right  and  un- 
dented faith,  for  he  did  no  sin,  but  was  supe- 


EPHESUS.     A.D.  431 


217 


rior  to  fault  and  altogether  free  from  sin,  and  thinking  of  two  sons,  this  anathematism  be- 
needed  no  sacrifice  for  himself.  Since  those  came  necessary  that  their  impiety  might  ap- 
who  think  differently  were  again  unreasonably  i  pear. 


XI. 

Whosoever  shall  not  confess  that  the  flesh  of  the  Lord  giveth  life  and  that  it  per- 
tains to  the  Word  of  God  the  Father  as  his  very  own,  but  shall  pretend  that  it  belongs 
to  another  person  who  is  united  to  him  [i.e.,  the  Word]  only  according  to  honour,  and 
who  has  served  as  a  dwelling  for  the  divinity ;  and  shall  not  rather  confess,  as  we  say, 
that  that  flesh  givetli  life  because  it  is  that  of  the  Word  who  giveth  life  to  all :  let  him 
be  anathema. 

NOTES. 


Nestorius. 

XI. 

If  any  one  maintains  that  the  flesh  which 
is  united  with  God  the  Word  is  by  the  power 
of  its  own  nature  life-giving,  whereas  the  Lord 
himself  says,  "It  is  the  Spirit  that  quicken- 
eth  ;  the  flesh  profiteth  nothing  "  (St.  John  vi. 
61),  let  him  be  anathema.  [He  adds,  "  God 
is  a  Spirit "  (St.  John  iv.  24).  If,  then,  any 
one  maintains  that  God  the  Logos  has  in  a 
carnal  manner,  in  his  substance,  become  flesh, 
and  persists  in  this  with  reference  to  the  Lord 
Christ ;  who  himself  after  his  resurrection  said 
to  his  disciples,  "  Handle  me  and  see ;  for  a 
spirit  hath  not  flesh  and  bones,  as  ye  behold 
me  having "  (St.  Luke  xxiv.  39) ;  let  him  be 
anathema.] 

Hefele. 

The  part  enclosed  in  brackets  is  certainly  a 
spurious  addition  and  is  wanting  in  many 
manuscripts.  Cf.  Marius  Mercator  [ed. 
Migne],  p.  919. 


St.  Cyril. 

(Declaratio  undecima.) 

We  perform  in  the  churches  the  holy,  life- 
giving,  and  unbloody  sacrifice ;  the  body,  as 
also  the  precious  blood,  which  is  exhibited  we 
believe  not  to  be  that  of  a  common  man  and 
of  any  one  like  unto  us,  but  receiving  it  rather 
as  his  own  body  and  as  the  blood  of  the  Word 
which  gives  all  things  life.  For  common  flesh 
cannot  give  life.  And  this  our  Saviour  himself 
testified  when  he  said:  "The  flesh  profiteth 
nothing,  it  is  the  Spirit  that  giveth  life."  For 
since  the  flesh  became  the  very  own  of  the 
Word,  therefore  we  understand  that  it  is  life- 
giving,  as  the  Saviour  himself  said  :  "As  the 
living  Father  hath  sent  me,  and  I  live  by  the 
Father ;  so  he  that  eateth  me  shall  live  by  me." 
Since  therefore  Nestorius  and  those  who  think 
with  him  rashly  dissolve  the  power  of  this 
mystery  ;  therefore  it  was  convenient  that  this 
anathematism  should  be  put  forth. 


XII. 

Whosoever  shall  not  recognize  that  the  Word  of  God  suffered  in  the  flesh,  that  he 
was  crucified  in  the  flesh,  and  that  likewise  in  that  same  flesh  he  tasted  death  and  that 
he  is  become  the  first-begotten  of  the  dead,  for,  as  lie  is  God,  he  is  the  life  and  it  is  he 
that  giveth  life  :  let  him  be  anathema. 


NOTES. 


Nestorius. 
xii. 


If  any  one,  in  confessing  the  sufferings  of 
the  flesh,  ascribes  these  also  to  the  Word  of 
God  as  to  the  flesh  in  which  he  appeared,  and 
thus  does  not  distinguish  the  dignity  of  the 
natures  ;  let  him  be  anathema. 

St.  Cyril. 
{Adv.  Orientates,  ad  XII.  Quoting  Athanasius.) 
For  if  the  body  is  of  another,  to  him  also 


must  the  sufferings  be  ascribed.  But  if  the 
flesh  is  the  Word's  (for  "  The  Word  was  made 
flesh ")  it  is  necessary  that  the  sufferings  of 
the  flesh  be  called  his  also  whose  is  the  flesh. 
But  whose  are  the  sufferings,  such  especially 
as  condemnation,  flagellation,  thirst,  the  cross, 
death,  and  other  such  like  infirmities  of  the 
body,  his  also  is  the  merit  and  the  grace. 
Therefore  rightly  and  properly  to  none  other 
are  these  sufferings  attributed  than  to  the 
Lord,  as  also  the  grace  is  from  him  ;  and  we 
shall  not  be  guilty  of  idolatry,  but  be  the  true 


218 


EPHESUS.     A.D.  431 


worshippers  of  God,  for  we  invoke  him  who 
is  no  creature  nor  any  common  man,  but  the 
natural  and  true  Son  of  God,  made  man,  and 
yet  the  same  Lord  and  God  and  Saviour. 

As  I  think,  these  quotations  will  suffice  to 
the  learned  for  the  proof  of  the  projDositions 
advanced,  the  Divine  Law  plainly  saying  that 
"  In  the  mouth  of  two  or  three  witnesses  every 
word  shall  be  established."  But  if  after  this 
any  one  would  still  seem  to  be  contentious, 


we  would  say  to  him  :  "  Go  thine  own  way. 
We  however  shall  follow  the  divine  Scriptures 
and  the  faith  of  the  Holy  Fathers." 

The  student  should  read  at  full  length  all 
Cyril's  defence  of  his  anathematisms,  also  his 
answers  to  the  criticisms  of  Theodoret,  and 
to  those  of  the  Orientals,  all  of  which  will  be 
found  in  his  works,  and  in  Labbe  and  Cossart, 
Concilia,  Tom.  III.,  811  et  seqq. 


EXTRACTS   FROM  THE  ACTS. 

SESSION  I.   (Continued). 


(L.  and  C,  Cone,  Tom 

[No  action  is  recorded  in  the  Acts  cts  hew- 
ing been  tedcen.  A  verbal  report  was  made 
by  certain  who  had  seen  Nestorius  during  the 
past  three  days,  that  they  ivere  hopeless  of 
any  repentance  on  his  part.  On  the  motion 
of  Flavian,  bishop  of  Philippi,  a  number  of 
passages  from  the  Fathers  were  read ;  and 
after  that  some  selections  from  the  loritings 
of  Nestorius.  A  letter  from  Capreolus,  Arch- 
bishop of  Carthage,  was  next  read,  excusing 
his  absence ;  after  the  reading  of  the  letter,  i 
which  makes  no  direct  reference  to  Nestorius 
whatever,  but  p>rays  the  Synod  to  see  to  it  that 
no  novelties  be  tolerated,  the  Acts  proceed. 
(Col.  534).] 

Cyril,  the  bishop  of  the  Church  of  Alex- 
andria, said :  As  this  letter  of  the  most 
reverend  and  pious  Capreolus,  bishop  of 


III.,  Col.  503.) 

Carthage,  which  has  been  read,  contains  a 
most  lucid  expression  of  opinion,  let  it  be 
inserted  in  the  Acts.  For  it  wishes  that 
the  ancient  dogmas  of  the  faith  should  be 
confirmed,  and  that  novelties,  absurdly  con- 
ceived and  impiously  brought  forth,  should 
be  reprobated  and  proscribed. 

All  the  bishops  at  the  same  time  cried 
out :  These  are  the  sentiments  ((poovai)  of 
all  of  us,  these  are  the  things  we  all  say — 
the  accomplishment  of  this  is  the  desire  of 
us  all. 

[Immediately  folloics  the  sentence  of  de- 
position and  the  subscriptions.  It  seems  al- 
most certain  that  something  has  dropped  out 
here,  most  pjrobably  the  whole' discussion  of 
Cyril's  XII.  Anathematisms.] 


DECREE  OF  THE  COUNCIL  AGAINST  NESTORIUS. 

(Found  in  all  the  Concilia  in  Greek  tuith  Latin  Versions.) 

As,  in  addition  to  other  things,  the  impious  Nestorius  has  not  obeyed  our  citation, 
and  did  not  receive  the  holy  bishops  who  were  sent  by  us  to  him,  we  were  compelled  to 
examine  his  ungodly  doctrines.  We  discovered  that  he  had  held  and  published  impi- 
ous doctrines  in  his  letters  and  treatises,  as  well  as  in  discourses  which  he  delivered  in 
this  city,  and  which  have  been  testified  to.  Compelled  thereto  by  the  canons  and  by 
the  letter  (avayicatcos  Kareirei')^!evT€<;  tnrb  re  rcov  icavovcov,  icai  i/c  t?/?  eVtcrToA,?}?,  k.  t.  \.) 
of  our  most  holy  father  and  fellow-servant  Coelestine,  the  Roman  bishop,  we  have  come, 
with  many  tears,  to  this  sorrowful  sentence  against  him,  namely,  that  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  whom  he  has  blasphemed,  decrees  by  the  holy  Synod  that  Nestorius  be  excluded 
from  the  episcopal  dignity,  and  from  all  priestly  communion. 


NOTES. 


The  words  for  which  I  have  given  the  origi- 
nal Greek,  are  not  mentioned  by  Canon 
Bright  in  his  Article  on  St.  Cyril  in  Smith  and 
Wace's  Dictionary  of  Christian  Biography ;  nor 


by  Ffoulkes  in  his  article  on  the  Council  of 
Ephesus  in  Smith  and  Cheetham's  Dictionary 
of  Christian  Antiquities.  They  do  not  appear 
in  Canon  Robertson's  History  of  the  Church. 


EPIIESUS.     A.D.  431 


219 


And  strangest  of  all,  Dean  Milman  cites  the 
sentence  in  English  in  the  text  and  in  Greek 
in  a  note  bnt  in  each  case  omits  all  mention 
of  the  letter  of  the  Pope,  marking  however  in 
the  Greek  that  there  is  an  omission.  (Lot. 
Chr.,  Bk.  II,  Chap.  III.) 1  I  also  note  that  the 
translation  in  the  English  edition  of  Hefele's 
History  of  the  Councils  (Vol.  III.,  p.  51)  is  mis- 
leading and  inaccurate,  "  Urged  by  the  canons, 
and  in  accordance  with  the  letter  etc."  The 
participle  by  itself  might  mean  nothing  more 
than  "urged"  (vide  Liddell  and  Scott  on  this 
verb  and  also  e-a'yco)  but  the  adverb  which  pre- 
cedes it,  dvayKcuwv,  certainly   is  sufficient  to 


necessitate  the  coacti  of  the  old  Latin  version 
which  I  have  followed,  translating  "  compelled 
thereto."  It  will  also  be  noticed  that  while 
the  prepositions  used  with  regard  to  the 
"  canons  "  and  the  "letter  "  are  different,  yet 
that  their  grammatical  relation  to  the  verb  is 
identical  is  shewn  by  the  re — i<ai,  which  proves 
the  translation  cited  above  to  be  utterly  in- 
correct. 

Hefele  for  the  "  canons "  refers  to  canon 
number  lxxiv.  of  the  Apostolic  Canons  ;  which 
orders  an  absent  bishop  to  be  summoned 
thrice  before  sentence  be  given  against  him. 


EXTRACTS  FROM  THE  ACTS. 


SESSION  II. 


(Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  III.,  col.  609.) 


The  most  pious  and  God-beloved  bishops, 
Arcadius  and  Projectus,  as  also  the  most 
beloved  -  of  -  God  Philip,  a  presbyter  and 
legate  of  the  Apostolic  See,  then  entered 
and  took  their  seats.2 

Philip  the  presbyter  and  legate  of  the 
Apostolic  See  said  :  "We  bless  the  holy  and 
adorable  Trinity  that  our  lowliness  has  been 
deemed  worthy  to  attend  your  holy  Synod. 
For  a  long  time  ago  (irakou)  our  most  holy 
and  blessed  pope  Ccelestine,  bishop  of  the 
Apostolic  See,  through  his  letters  to  that 
holy  and  most  pious  man  Cyril,  bishop  of 
Alexandria,  gave  judgment  concerning  the 
present  cause  and  affair  (wpiaev)  which  let- 
ters have  been  shewn  to  your  holy  assem- 
bly. And  now  again  for  the  corroboration 
of  the  Catholic  (/ca-&oA.i/o}?)  faith,  he  has  sent 
through  us  letters  to  all  your  holinesses, 
which  you  will  bid  (tceXovaaTe)  to  be  read 
with  becoming  reverence  (7rpe7r<Wa)?)  and 
to  be  entered  on  the  ecclesiastical  minutes. 

Arcadius,  a  bishop  and  legate  of  the 
Roman  Church  said:  May  it  please  your 
blessedness  to  give  order  that  the  letters 
of  the  holy  and  ever-to-be-mentioned-with- 
veneration  Pope  Ccelestine,  bishop  of  the 
Apostolic  See,  which  have  been  brought  by 
us,  be  read,  from  which  your  reverence  will 


be  able  to  see  what  care  he  has  for  all  the 
Churches. 

Projectus,  a  bishop  and  legate  of  the  Ro- 
man Church  said,  May  it  please,  etc.  [The 
same  as  Arcadius  had  said  verbatim  !] 

And  afterwards  the  most  holy  and  be- 
loved-of-God  Cyril,  bishop  of  the  Church  of 
Alexandria,  spoke  as  is  next  in  order  con- 
tained ;  Siricius,  notary  of  the  holy  Catholic 
(/caSoXiKfjs)  Church  of  Rome  read  it. 

Cyril,  the  bishop  of  Alexandria  said : 
Let  the  letter  received  from  the  most  holy 
and  altogether  most  blessed  Ccelestine, 
bishop  of  the  Apostolic  See  of  Rome  be 
read  to  the  holy  Synod  with  fitting  honour. 

Siricius,  notary  of  the  holy  Catholic  (/ca- 
So\iKrj<;)  Church  of  the  city  of  Rome  read  it. 

And  after  it  was  read  in  Latin,  Juvenal, 
the  bishop  of  Jerusalem  said :  Let  the 
writings  of  the  most  holy  and  blessed  bishop 
of  great  Rome  which  have  just  been  read, 
be  entered  on  the  minutes. 

And  all  the  most  reverend  bishops  prayed 
that  the  letter  might  be  translated  and  read. 

Philip,  the  presbyter  of  the  Apostolic  See 
and  Legate  said :  The  custom  has  been 
sufficiently  complied  with,  that  the  writings 
of  the  Apostolic  See  should  first  be  read  in 
Latin."     But  now  since  your  holiness  has 


1  Complaint  of  all  this  has  very  justly  heen made  recently  by  the 
Rev.  Luke  Rivineton,  a  Roman  Catholic  writer,  in  his  work  The 
Primitive  Church  and  the  See  of  Peter,  p.  336. 

2  It  should  be  noted  that  in  the  Acts  Cyril  is  described  as  hav- 
ing "  the  place  of  the  most  holy  and  sacred  Archbishop  of  the 
Roman  Church  Coelestine."  Hefele  says  "  that  Cyril  presided  as 
Pope's  vicar  is  asserted  also  by  Mennas  of  Constantinople  and 


other  Greek  bishops  in  their  letter  to  Pope  Vigilius,  in  Mausi,  t. 
ix.,  p.  62  ;  Hardouin,  t.  iii.,  p.  10."  (Hef.,  Hist,  of  the  Councils, 
Vol.  III.,  p.  46,  n.  4.) 

3  This  seems  to  me  to  be  the  climax  of  improbable  statements. 
There  are  many  other  things  which  will  induce  the  curious  reader 
to  suspect  that  the  Acts  are  not  in  good  shape. 


220 


EPHESUS.     A.D.  431 


demanded  that  they  be  read  in  Greek  also, 
it  is  necessary  that  your  holiness's  desire 
should  be  satisfied ;  We  have  taken  care 
that  this  be  done,  and  that  the  Latin  be 
turned  into  Greek.  Give  order  therefore 
that  it  be  received  and  read  in  your  holy 
hearing. 

Arcadius  and  Projectus,  bishops  and  le- 
gates said,  As  your  blessedness  ordered  that 
the  writings  "which  we  brought  should  be 


brought  to  the  knowledge  of  all,  for  of  our 
holy  brethren  bishops  there  are  not  a  few 
who  do  not  understand  Latin,  therefore  the 
letter  has  been  translated  into  Greek  and  if 
you  so  command  let  it  be  read. 

Flavian,  the  bishop  of  Philippi  said  :  Let 
the  translation  of  the  letter  of  the  most 
holy  and  beloved  of  God,  bishop  of  the  Bo- 
man  Church  be  received  and  read. 

Peter,  the  presbyter  of  Alexandria  and 
primicerius  of  the  notaries  read  as  follows : 


THE  LETTEE  OF  POPE  CCELESTINE  TO  THE  SYNOD  OF  EPHESUS. 

(Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  III.,  col.  613.     Also  Migne,  Pat.  Lai.,  Tom.  L., 

col.  505.1) 


Coelestine  the  bishop  to  the  holy  Synod 
assembled  at  Ephesus,  brethren  beloved  and 
most  longed  for,  greeting  in  the  Lord. 

A  Synod  of  priests  gives  witness  to  the 
presence  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  For  true  is 
that  which  we  read,  since  the  Truth  cannot 
lie,  to  wit,  the  promise  of  the  Gospel ; 
"Where  two  or  three  are  gathered  together 
in  my  name,  there  am  I  in  the  midst  of 
them."  And  since  this  is  so,  if  the  Holy 
Spirit  is  not  absent  from  so  small  a  number 
how  much  more  may  we  believe  he  is  pres- 
ent when  so  great  a  multitude  of  holy  ones 
are  assembled  together !  Every  council  is 
holy  on  account  of  a  peculiar  veneration 
which  is  its  due  ;  for  in  every  such  council 
the  reverence  which  should  be  paid  to  that 
most  famous  council  of  the  Apostles  of 
which  we  read  is  to  be  had  regard  to.  Never 
was  the  Master,  whom  they  had  received  to 
preach,  lacking  to  this,  but  ever  was  present 
as  Lord  and  Master ;  and  never  were  those 
who  taught  deserted  by  their  teacher.  For 
he  that  had  sent  them  was  their  teacher  ;  he 
who  had  commanded  what  was  to  be  taught, 
was  their  teacher ;  he  who  affirms  that  he 
himself  is  heard  in  his  Apostles,  was  their 
teacher.  This  dut}r  of  preaching  has  been 
entrusted  to  all  the  Lord's  priests  in  com- 
mon, for  by  right  of  inheritance  we  are 
bound  to  undertake  this  solicitude,  who- 
ever of  us  preach  the  name  of  the  Lord  in 
divers  lands  in  their  stead :  for  he  said  to 
them,  "  Go,  teach  all  nations."  You,  dear 
brethren,  should  observe  that  we  have  re- 


ceived a  general  command :  for  he  wills  that 
all  of  us  should  perform  that  office,  which 
he  thus  entrusted  in  common  to  all  the 
Apostles.  We  must  needs  follow  our  pred- 
ecessors. Let  us  all,  then,  undertake  their 
labours,  since  we  are  the  successors  in  their 
honour.  And  we  shew  forth  our  diligence 
in  preaching  the  same  doctrines  that  they 
taught,  beside  which,  according  to  the  ad- 
monition of  the  Apostle,  we  are  forbidden 
to  add  aught.  For  the  office  of  keeping 
what  is  committed  to  our  trust  is  no  less 
dignified  than  that  of  handing  it  down. 

They  sowed  the  seed  of  the  faith.  This 
shall  be  our  care  that  the  coming  of  our 
great  father  of  the  family,  to  whom  alone 
assuredly  this  fulness  of  the  Apostles  is  as- 
signed, may  find  fruit  uncorrupt  and  many 
fold.  For  the  vase  of  election  tells  us  that 
it  is  not  sufficient  to  plant  and  to  water  un- 
less God  gives  the  increase.  We  must  strive 
therefore  in  common  to  keep  the  faith  which 
has  come  down  to  us  to-day,  through  the 
Apostolic  Succession.  For  we  are  expected 
to  walk  according  to  the  Apostle.  For  now 
not  our  appearance  (s-pecies)  but  our  faith  is 
called  in  question.  Spiritual  weapons  are 
those  we  must  take,  because  the  war  is  one 
of  minds,  and  the  weapons  are  words  ;  so 
shall  we  be  strong  in  the  faith  of  our  King. 
Now  the  Blessed  Apostle  Paul  admonishes 
that  all  should  remain  in  that  place  in  which 
he  bid  Timothy  remain.  The  same  place 
therefore,  the  same  cause,  lays  upon  us  the 
same  duty.     Let  us  now  also  do  and  study 


1  This  letter  we  know  was  originally  written  in  Latin,  and  that 
it  was  translated  into  Greek  and" then  read  afterwards  in  that  lan- 
guage to  the  Council.  There  would  seem  to  be  no  doubt  that  the 
Greek  text  we  now  find  in  the  Acts  is  that  first  translation,  but 
whether  the  Latin  is  the  original  or  whether  it  is  a  translation  back 
asain  from  the  Greek  is  not  known,  so  far  as  I  am  aware.    Cer- 


tainly the  Latin  is  of  the  most  extraordinary  character,  and  sug- 
gests that  it  was  the  work  of  one  not  skilled  in  that  toneue.  The 
text  in  several  places  is  manifestly  corrupt  and  the  Greek  and 
Latin  do  not  always  agree.  If  I  may  venture  to  express  an  opin- 
ion I  should  say  that  the  Greek  was  more  lucid.  Although  in 
nineteen  places  Labbe  considers  the  true  reading  uncertain. 


EPHESUS.     A.D.  431 


221 


that  which  he  then  commanded  him  to  do. 
And  let  no  one  think  otherwise,  and  let  no 
one  pay  heed  to  over  strange  fables,  as  he 
himself  ordered.  Let  us  be  unanimous, 
thinking  the  same  thing,  for  this  is  expedi- 
ent :  let  us  do  nothing  out  of  contention, 
nothing  out  of  vain  glory :  let  us  be  in  all 
things  of  one  mind,  of  one  heart,  when  the 
faith  which  is  one,  is  attacked.  Let  the 
whole  body  grieve  and  mourn  in  common 
with  us.  He  who  is  to  judge  the  world  is 
called  into  judgment ;  he  who  is  to  criticise 
all,  is  himself  made  the  object  of  criticism, 
he  who  redeemed  us  is  made  to  suffer  cal- 
umny. Dear  Brethren,  gird  ye  with  the  ar- 
mour of  God.  Ye  know  what  helmet  must 
protect  our  head,  what  breast -plate  our 
breast.  For  this  is  not  the  first  time  the 
ecclesiastical  camps  have  received  you  as 
their  rulers.  Let  no  one  donbt  that  by  the 
favour  of  the  Lord  who  maketh  twain  to  be 
one,  there  will  be  peace,  and  that  arms  will 
be  laid  aside  since  the  very  cause  defends 
itself. 

Let  us  look  once  again  at  these  words  of 
our  Doctor,  which  he  uses  with  express 
reference  to  bishops,  saying,  "Take  heed 
to  yourselves  and  to  the  whole  flock,  over 
which  the  Holy  Ghost  has  placed  you  as 
bishop,  that  ye  rule  the  church  of  God, 
which  he  hath  purchased  with  his  blood." 

We  read  that  they  who  heard  this  at 
Ephesus,  the  same  place  at  which  your  holi- 
ness is  come  together,  were  called  thence. 
To  them  therefore  to  whom  this  preaching 
of  the  faith  was  known,  to  them  also  let 
your  defence  of  the  same  faith  also  be 
known.  Let  us  shew  them  the  constancy 
of  our  mind  Avith  that  reverence  which  is 
due  to  matters  of  great  importance  ;  which 
things  peace  has  guarded  for  a  long  time 
with  pious  understanding. 

Let  there  be  announced  by  you  what 
things  have  been  preserved  intact  from  the 
Apostles  ;  for  the  words  of  tyrannical  oppo- 
sition are  never  admitted  against  the  King 
of  Kings,  nor  can  the  business  of  truth  be 
oppressed  by  falsehood. 

I  exhort  you,  most  blessed  brethren,  that 


love  alone  be  regarded  in  which  we  ought 
to  remain,  according  to  the  voice  of  John 
the  Apostle  whose  reliques  Ave  venerate  in 
this  city.  Let  common  prayer  be  offered 
to  the  Lord.  For  we  can  form  some  idea 
of  what  will  be  the  power  of  the  divine 
presence  at  the  united  intercession  of  such 
a  multitude  of  priests,  by  considering  Iioav 
the  very  place  Avas  moved  where,  as  we 
read,  the  TAvelve  made  together  their  sup- 
plication. And  what  was  the  purport  of 
that  prayer  of  the  Apostles  ?  It  was  that 
they  might  receive  grace  to  speak  the  Avord 
of  God  with  confidence,  and  to  act  through 
its  poAArer,  both  of  AA'hich  they  received  by 
the  favour  of  Christ  our  God.  And  noAv 
Avhat  else  is  to  be  asked  for  by  your  holy 
council,  except  that  ye  may  speak  the  Word 
of  the  Lord  with  confidence?  What  else 
than  that  he  Avould  give  you  grace  to  pre- 
serve that  Avhich  he  has  given  you  to 
preach?  that  being  filled  Avith  the  Holy 
Ghost,  as  it  is  written,  ye  may  set  forth 
that  one  truth  Avhich  the  Spirit  himself  has 
taught  you,  although  Avith  divers  voices. 

Animated,  in  brief,  by  all  these  consider- 
ations (for,  as  the  Apostle  says  :  "  I  speak 
to  them  that  knoAv  the  law,  and  I  speak 
wisdom  among  them  that  are  perfect "), 
stand  fast  by  the  Catholic  faith,  and  defend 
the  peace  of  the  Churches,  for  so  it  is  said, 
both  to  those  past,  present,  and  future,  ask- 
ing and  preserving  "  those  things  Avhich  be- 
long to  the  peace  of  Jerusalem." 

Out  of  our  solicitude,  we  have  sent  our 
holy  brethren  and  fellow  priests,  who  are 
at  one  with  us  and  are  most  approved  men, 
Arcadius,  and  Projectus,  the  bishops,  and 
our  presbyter,  Philip,  that  they  may  be 
present  at  Avhat  is  done  and  may  carry  out 
Avhat  things  have  been  already  decreed  by 
us  (qucti  a  nobis  antea  statuta  sunt,  exequan- 
tur). 

To  the  performing  of  which  we  have  no 
doubt  that  your  holiness  will  assent  Avhen  it 
is  seen  that  what  has  been  decreed  is  for 
the  security  of  the  whole  church.  Given 
the  viij  of  the  Ides  of  May,  in  the  consulate 
of  Bassus  and  Antiochus. 


222 


EPHESUS.     A.D.  431 


EXTEACTS   FROM  THE   ACTS. 


SESSION  II.  (Continued.) 
(Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  III.,  col.  617.) 


And  all  the  most  reverend  bishops  at  the 
same  time  cried  out.  This  is  a  just  judg- 
ment. To  Coelestine,  a  new  Paul !  To  Cyril 
a  new  Pavd !  To  Coelestine  the  guardian  of 
the  faith  !  To  Coelestine  of  one  mind  with 
the  synod  !  To  Coelestine  the  whole  Synod 
offers  its  thanks!  One  Coelestine!  One 
Cyril !  One  faith  of  the  Synod !  One  faith 
of  the  world ! 

Projectus,  the  most  reverend  bishop  and 
legate,  said :  Let  your  holiness  consider 
the  form  {rinrov)  of  the  writings  of  the  holy 
and  venerable  pope  Coelestine,  the  bishop, 
who  has  exhorted  your  holiness  (not  as  if 
teaching  the  ignorant,  but  as  reminding 
them  that  know)  that  those  things  which 
he  had  long  ago  defined,  and  now  thought 
it  right  to  remind  you  of,  ye  might  give 
command  to  be  carried  out  to  the  utter- 
most, according  to  the  canon  of  the  com- 
mon faith,  and  according  to  the  use  of  the 
Catholic  Church. 

Eirmus,  the  bishop  of  Coesarea  in  Cappa- 
docia  said :  The  Apostolic  and  holy  see  of 
the  most  holy  bishop  Coelestine,  hath  pre- 
viously given  a  decision  and  type  (rinrov) 
in  this  matter,  through  the  writings  which 
were  sent  to  the  most  God  beloved  bishops, 
to  wit  to  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  and  to  Juvenal 
of  Jerusalem,  and  to  Rufus  of  Thessalonica, 
and  to  the  holy  churches,  both  of  Constan- 
tinople and  of  Antioch.  This  we  have  also 
followed  and  (since  the  limit  set  for  Nesto- 
rius's  emendation  was  long  gone  by,  and 
much  time  has  passed  since  our  arrival  at 
the  city  of  Ephesus  in  accordance  with  the 
decree  of  the  most  pious  emperor,  and 
thereupon  having  delayed  no  little  time  so 
that  the  day  fixed  by  the  emperor  was  past ; 
and  since  Nestorius  although  cited  had  not 
appeared)  we  carried  into  effect  the  type 
(tvttov)  having  pronounced  against  him  a 
canonical  and  apostolical  judgment. 

Arcadius  the  most  reverend  bishop  and 
legate,    said :      Although   our   sailing   was 


slow,  and  contrary  winds  hindered  us  espe- 
cially, so  that  we  did  not  know  whether 
Ave  should  arrive  at  the  destined  place,  as 
we  had  hoped,  nevertheless  by  God's  good 
providence  .  .  .  Wherefore  we  desire 
to  ask  your  blessedness,  that  you  command 
that  we  be  taught  what  has  been  already 
decreed  by  your  holiness. 

Philip,  presbyter  and  legate  of  the  Apos- 
tolic See  said  :  We  offer  our  thanks  to  the 
holy  and  venerable  Synod,  that  when  the 
writings  of  our  holy  and  blessed  pope  had 
been  read  to  you,  the  holy  members  by  our 
[or  your]  holy  voices,1  ye  joined  yourselves 
to  the  holy  head  also  by  your  holy  acclama- 
tions. For  your  blessedness  is  not  ignorant 
that  the  head  of  the  whole  faith,  the  head 
of  the  Apostles,  is  blessed  Peter  the  Apos- 
tle. And  since  now  our  mediocrity,  after 
having  been  tempest-tossed  and  much  vexed, 
has  arrived,  we  ask  that  ye  give  order  that 
there  be  laid  before  us  what  things  were 
done  in  this  holy  Synod  before  our  arrival ; 
in  order  that  according  to  the  opinion  of 
our  blessed  pope  and  of  this  present  holy 
assembly,  we  likewise  may  ratify  their  de- 
termination. 

Theodotus,  the  bishop  of  Ancyra  said: 
The  God  of  the  whole  world  has  made 
manifest  the  justice  of  the  judgment  pro- 
nounced by  the  holy  Synod  by  the  writings 
of  the  most  religious  bishop  Coelestine,  and 
by  the  coming  of  your  holiness.  Eor  ye 
have  made  manifest  the  zeal  of  the  most 
holy  and  reverend  bishop  Coelestine,  and 
his  care  for  the  pious  faith.  And  since 
very  reasonably  your  reverence  is  desirous 
of  learning  what  has  been  done  from  the 
minutes  of  the  acts  concerning  the  deposi- 
tion of  Nestorius  your  reverence  will  be 
fully  convinced  of  the  justice  of  the  sen- 
tence, and  of  the  zeal  of  the  holy  Synod, 
and  the  symphony  of  the  faith  which  the 
most  pious  and  holy  bishop  Coelestine  has 

1  This  seems  to  be  certainly  corrupt.    I  have  literally  followed 
the  Greek. 


EPHESUS.     A.D.  431 


223 


proclaimed  with  a  great  voice,  of  course  af- 
ter your  full  conviction,  the  rest  shall  be 
added  to  the  present  action. 

[In  the  Ads  follow  two  short  letters  from 


Ccelestine,  one  to  the  Emperor  and  the  other 
to  Cyrilf  but  nothing  is  said  about  them,  or 
hoiv  they  got  there,  and  thus  abruptly  ends 
the  account  of  this  session.] 


EXTRACTS   FROM  THE  ACTS. 

SESSION  III. 

(Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  III.,  col.  G21.) 


Juvenal  the  bishop  of  Jerusalem  said  to 
Arcadius  and  Projectus  the  most  reverend 
bishops,  and  to  Philip  the  most  revereud 
presbyter :  Yesterday  while  this  holy  and 
great  synod  was  in  session,  when  your 
holiness  was  present,  you  demanded  after 
the  reading  of  the  letter  of  the  most  holy 
and  blessed  bishop  of  Great  Rome,  Cceles- 
tine, that  the  minutes  made  in  the  Acts 
with  regard  to  the  deposition  of  Nestorius 
the  heretic  should  be  read.  And  thereupon 
the  Synod  ordered  this  to  be  done.  Your 
holiness  will  be  good  enough  to  inform  us 
whether  you  have  read  them  and  under- 
stand their  power. 

Philip  the  presbyter  and  legate  of  the 
Apostolic  See  said :  From  reading  the  Acts 
we  have  found  what  things  have  been  done 
in  your  holy  synod  with  regard  to  Nesto- 
rius. We  have  found  from  the  minutes  that 
all  things  have  been  decided  in  accordance 
with  the  canons  and  with  ecclesiastical  dis- 
cipline. And  now  also  we  seek  from  your 
honour,  although  it  may  be  useless,  that 
what  things  have  been  read  in  your  synod, 
the  same  should  now  again  be  read  to  us 
also  ;  so  that  we  may  follow  the  formula 
{rvrrcp)  of  the  most  holy  pope  Ccelestine 
(who  committed  this  same  care  to  us),  and 
of  your  holiness  also,  and  may  be  able  to 
confirm  (/3e/3at,oi)crac)  the  judgment. 

[Arcadius  having  seconded  Philip's  motion, 
Memnon  directed  the  acts  to  be  read  which  toas 
done  by  the  primicerius  of  the  notaries.'] 

Phiiip  the  presbyter  and  legate  of  the 
Apostolic  See  said  :  There  is  no  doubt,  and 
in  fact  it  has  been  known  in  all  ages,  that 
the  holy  and  most  blessed  Peter,  prince 
(e'^a/3%o?)  and  head  of  the  Apostles,  pillar 
of  the  faith,  and  foundation  (SefiiXtos;)  of 
the  Catholic  Church,  received  the  keys  of 
the  kingdom  from  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
the  Saviour  and  Redeemer  of  the  human 


race,  and  that  to  him  was  given  the  power 
of  loosing  and  binding  sins  :  who  down 
even  to  to-day  and  forever  both  lives  and 
judges  in  his  successors.  The  holy  and 
most  blessed  pope  Ccelestine,  according  to 
due  order,  is  his  successor  and  holds  his 
place,  and  us  he  sent  to  supply  his  place 
in  this  holy  synod,  which  the  most  humane 
and  Christian  Emperors  have  commanded 
to  assemble,  bearing  in  mind  and  continu- 
ally watching  over  the  Catholic  faith.  For 
they  both  have  kept  and  are  now  keeping 
intact  the  apostolic  doctrine  handed  down 
to  them  from  their  most  pious  and  humane 
grandfathers  and  fathers  of  holy  memory 
down  to  the  present  time,  etc. 

[There  is  no  further  reference  in  the  speech 
to  the  papal  prerogatives.] 

Arcadius  the  most  reverend  bishop  and 
legate  of  the  Apostolic  See  said :  Nestorius 
hath  brought  us  great  sorrow.  .  .  .  And 
since  of  his  own  accord  he  hath  made  him- 
self an  alien  and  an  exile  from  us,  we  fol- 
lowing the  sanctions  handed  down  from  the 
beginning  by  the  holy  Apostles,  and  by  the 
Catholic  Church  (for  they  taught  what  they 
had  received  from  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ), 
also  following  the  types  (rvirois)  of  Cceles- 
tine, most  holy  pope  of  the  Apostolic  See, 
who  has  condescended  to  send  us  as  his  ex- 
ecutors of  this  business,  and  also  following 
the  decrees  of  the  holy  Synod  [we  give  this 
as  our  conclusion]  :  Let  Nestorius  know  that 
he  is  deprived  of  all  episcopal  dignity,  and 
is  an  alien  from  the  whole  Church  and  from 
the  communion  of  all  its  priests. 

Projectus,  bishop  and  legate  of  the  Ro- 
man Church  said  :  Most  clearly  from  the 
reading,  etc.  .  .  .  Moreover  I  also,  by 
my  authority  as  legate  of  the  holy  Apostolic 
See,  define,  being  with  my  brethren  an  ex- 
ecutor (i/cf3if3aaTr]<;)  of  the  aforesaid  sen- 
tence, that  the  beforenamed  Nestorius  is  an 


224 


EPHESUS.     A.D.  431 


enemy  of  the  truth,  a  corrupter  of  the  faith, 
and  as  guilty  of  the  things  of  which  he  was 
accused,  has  been  removed  from  the  grade 
of  Episcopal  honour,  and  moreover  from  the 
communion  of  all  orthodox  priests. 

Cyril,  the  bishop  of  Alexandria  said  :  The 
professions  which  have  been  made  by  Ar- 
cadius  and  Projectus,  the  most  holy  and 
pious  bishops,  as  also  by  Philip,  the  most 
religious  presbyter  of  the  Roman  Church, 
stand  manifest  to  the  holy  Synod.  For  they 
have  made  their  profession  in  the  place  of 
the  Apostolic  See,  and  of  the  whole  of  the 
holy  synod  of  the  God-beloved  and  most 
holy  bishops  of  the  West.  Wherefore  let 
those  things  which  were  defined  by  the  most 
holy  Ccelestine,  the  God-beloved  bishop,  be 
carried  into  effect,  and  the  vote  cast  against 
Nestorius  the  heretic,  by  the  holy  Synod, 
which  met  in  the  metropolis  of  Ephesus 
be  agreed  to  universally ;  for  this  purpose 


let  there  be  added  to  the  already  prepared 
acts  the  proceedings  of  yesterday  and  to- 
day, and  let  them  be  shewn  to  their  holiness, 
so  that  by  their  subscription  according  to 
custom,  their  canonical  agreement  with  all 
of  us  may  be  manifest. 

Arcadius  the  most  reverend  bishop  and 
legate  of  the  Roman  Church,  said :  Accord- 
ing to  the  acts  of  this  holy  Synod,  we  nee- 
essarily  confirm  with  our  subscriptions 
their  doctrines. 

The  Holy  Synod  said :  Since  Arcadius 
and  Projectus  the  most  reverend  and  most 
religious  bishops  and  legates  and  Philip, 
the  presbyter  and  legate  of  the  Apostolic 
See,  have  said  that  they  are  of  the  same 
mind  with  us.  it  only  remains,  that  they 
redeem  their  promises  and  confirm  the  acts 
with  their  signatures,  and  then  let  the  min- 
utes of  the  acts  be  shewn  to  them. 

[The  three  then  signed.'] 


THE  CANONS  OF  THE  TWO   HUNDRED  HOLY  AND  BLESSED 
FATHERS  WHO  MET  AT  EPHESUS.1 

(Critical  Annotations  on  the  text  will  be  found  in  Dr.  Routlis  Scriptorum  Eccl.  Opusc. 

Tom.  II.  [Ed.  Ill]  p.  85.) 

The  holy  and  ecumenical  Synod,  gathered  together  in  Ephesus  by  the  decree  of 
our  most  religious  Emperors,  to  the  bishops,  presbyters,  deacons,  and  all  the  people  in 
every  province  and  city : 

When  we  had  assembled,  according  to  the  religious  decree  [of  the  Emperors] ,  in  the 
Metropolis  of  Ephesus,  certain  persons,  a  little  more  than  thirty  in  number,  withdrew 
from  amongst  us,  having  for  the  leader  of  their  schism  John,  Bishop  of  Antioch.  Their 
names  are  as  follows :  first,  the  said  John  of  Antioch  in  Syria,  John  of  Damascus,  Alex- 
ander of  Apamea,  Alexander  of  Hierapolis,  Himerius  of  Nicomedia,  Eritilas  of  Hera- 
clea,  Helladius  of  Tarsus,  Maximin  of  Anazarbus,  Theodore  of  Marcianopolis,  Peter  of 
Trajanopolis,  Paul  of  Emissa,  Polychronius  of  Heracleopolis,  Euthyrius  of  Tyana,  Mele- 
tius  of  Neocaesarea,  Theodoret  of  Cyrus,  Apringius  of  Chalcedon,  Macarius  of  Laodicea 
Magna,  Zosys  of  Esbus,  Sallust  of  Oorycus  in  Cilicia,  Hesychius  of  Castabala  in  Cili- 
cia,  Valentine  of  Mutloblaca,  Eustathius  of  Parnassus,  Philip  of  Theodosia,  and  Daniel, 
and  Dexianus,  and  Julian,  and  Cyril,  and  Olympius,  and  Diogenes,  Polius,  Theophanes 
of  Philadelphia,  Trajan  of  Augusta,  Aurelius  of  Irenopolis,  Mysseus  of  Aradus,  Hella- 
dius of  Ptolemais.  These  men,  having  no  privilege  of  ecclesiastical  communion  on  the 
ground  of  a  priestly  authority,  by  which  they  could  injure  or  benefit  any  persons  ;  since 
some  of  them  had  already  been  deposed  ;  and  since  from  their  refusing  to  join  in  our 
decree  against  Nestorius,  it  was  manifestly  evident  to  all  men  that  they  were  all  pro- 
moting the  opinions  of  Nestorius  and  Celestius  ;  the  Holy  Synod,  by  one  common  de- 
cree, deposed  them  from  all  ecclesiastical  communion,  and  deprived  them  of  all  their 
priestly  power  by  which  they  might  injure  or  profit  any  persons. 


CANON  I. 

"Whereas  it  is  needful  that  they  who  were  detained  from  the  holy  Synod  and  re- 
mained in  their  own  district  or  city,  for  any  reason,  ecclesiastical  or  personal,  should 
not  be  ignorant  of  the  matters  which  were  thereby  decreed ;  we,  therefore,  notify  your 
holiness  and  charity  that  if  any  Metropolitan  of  a  Province,  forsaking  the  holy  and 
Ecumenical  Synod,  has  joined  the  assembly  of  the  apostates,  or  shall  join  the  same 
hereafter  ;  or,  if  he  has  adopted,  or  shall  hereafter  adopt,  the  doctrines  of  Celestius,  he 
has  no  power  in  any  way  to  do  anything  in  opposition  to  the  bishops  of  the  province, 
since  he  is  already  cast  forth  from  all  ecclesiastical  communion  and  made  incapable  of 
exercising  his  ministry ;  but  he  shall  himself  be  subject  in  all  things  to  those  very 
bishops  of  the  province  and  to  the  neighbouring  orthodox  metropolitans,  and  shall  be 
degraded  from  his  episcopal  rank. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  I. 

If  a  metropolitan,  having  deserted  his  synod, 
adheres  or  shall  adhere  to  Celestine,  let  him  be 
cast  out. 

Nicholas  Hydruntinus. 

Scholion  concerning  Celestine  and  Celes- 
tius. Whoso  finds  at  the  end  of  the  fourth 
canon  of  the  Holy  Synod  of  Ephesus  [and  the 


same  is  true  of  this  first  canon.  Ed.]  "  Clerics 
who  shall  have  consented  to  Celestine  or  Nes- 
torius, should  be  deposed,"  let  him  not  read 
"Celestine"  with  an  "n,"  but  "Celestius" 
without  the  "  n."  For  Celestine  was  the  holy 
and  orthodox  Pope  of  Rome,  Celestius  was 
the  heretic. 

It  is  perfectly  certain  that  this  was  no  ac- 


'  This  is  th«  caption  in  most  MSS.,  but  in  the  Cod.  Seguierianus  it  is  quite  different.     Vide  Labbe,  Cone,  III.,  802. 
VOL.    XIV.  Q 


226 


EPHESTJS.     A.D.  431 


cident  on  the  part  of  Aristenus,  for  in  bis 
commentary  on  Canon  V.,  lie  expressly  says 
that  "Celestine  was  Bishop  of  Rome  "  and 
goes  on  to  affirm  that,  "The  Holy  Synod  de- 
creed that  they  who  embraced  the  opinions 
of  Nestorius  and  Celestine,"  etc.  What  per- 
haps is  equally  astonishing  is  that  Nicholas 
Hydruntinus,  while  correcting  the  name,  still 
is  of  opinion  that  Celestius  was  a  pope  of 
Rome  and  begins  his  scholion  with  the  title, 
■jrepi  KeAccmVou  kclI  KeAeortov,  IItt7ruJv  Poifir;?.    Bev- 


eridge  well  points  out  that  this  confusion  is 
all  the  more  remarkable  as  in  the  Kalendar  of 
the  Saints  observed  at  that  very  time  by  the 
Greeks,  on  the  eighth  day  of  April  was  kept 
the  memory  of  "  Celestine,  Pope  of  Rome,  as 
a  Saint  and  Champion  against  the  Nestorian 
heretics."     (Bev.,  Annot,  in  C.  v.). 

Simeon  the  Logothete  adds  to  this  epitome 
the  words,  ko.1  to  i£f}s  d8toiK?jTos  which  are  nec- 
essary to  make  the  sense  complete. 


EXCURSUS  ON  THE  CONCILIABULUM  OF  JOHN  OF  ANTIOCH. 

The  assembly  referred  to  in  this  canon  is  one  held  by  John  of  Antioch  who  had  delayed 
his  coming  so  as  to  hamper  the  meeting  of  the  synod.  John  was  a  friend  of  Nestorius  and 
made  many  fruitless  attempts  to  induce  him  to  accept  the  orthodox  faith.  It  will  be  noticed 
that  the  conciliabulum  was  absolutely  silent  with  respect  to  Nestorius  and  his  doctrine  and 
contented  itself  with  attacking  St.  Cyril  and  the  orthodox  Memnon,  the  bishop  of  Ephesus. 
St.  Cyril  and  his  friends  did  indeed  accuse  the  Antiochenes  of  being  adherents  of  Nestorius, 
and  in  a  negative  way  they  certainly  were  so,  and  were  in  open  opposition  to  the  defenders 
of  the  orthodox  faith  ;  but,  as  Tillemont l  has  well  pointed  out,  they  did  not  theologically 
agree  with  the  heresy  of  Nestorius,  gladly  accepted  the  orthodox  watchword  "  Mother  of 
God,"  and  subsequently  agreed  to  his  deposition. 

The  first  session  of  the  Council  of  Ephesus  had  already  taken  place  on  June  22,  and  it 
was  only  on  June  26th  or  27th,  that  John  of  Antioch  arrived  at  last  at  Ephesus. 

(Hefele,  History  of  the  Councils,  Vol.  III.,  p.  55  ct  seqq.) 
The  Synod  immediately  sent  a  deputation  to  meet  him,  consisting  of  several  bishops  and 
clerics,  to  show  him  proper  respect,  and  at  the  same  time  to  make  him  acquainted  with  the 
deposition  of  Nestorius,  so  that  he  might  not  be  drawn  into  any  intercourse  with  him.  The 
soldiers  who  surrounded  Archbishop  John  prevented  the  deputation  from  speaking  to  him 
in  the  street ;  consequently  they  accompanied  him  to  his  abode,  but  were  compelled  to  wait 
here  for  several  hours,  exposed  to  the  insults  of  the  soldiers,  and  at  last,  when  they  had  dis- 
charged their  commission,  were  driven  home,  ill-treated  and  beaten.  Count  Irenaeus,  the 
friend  of  Nestorius,  had  suggested  this  treatment,  and  approved  of  it.  The  envoys  immedi- 
ately informed  the  Synod  of  what  had  happened,  and  showed  the  wounds  which  they  had 
received,  which  called  forth  great  indignation  against  John  of  Antioch.  According  to  the 
representation  of  Memnon,  excommunication  was  for  this  reason  pronounced  against  him  ; 
but  we  shall  see  further  on  that  this  did  not  take  place  until  afterwards,  and  it  is  clear  that 
Memnon,  in  his  brief  narrative,  has  passed  over  an  intermediate  portion — the  threefold  invi- 
tation of  John.  In  the  meantime,  Candidian  had  gone  still  further  in  his  opposition  to  the 
members  of  the  synod,  causing  them  to  be  annoyed  and  insulted  by  his  soldiers,  and  even 
cutting  off  their  supply  of  food,  while  he  provided  Nestorius  with  a  regular  body-guard  of 
armed  peasants.  John  of  Antioch,  immediately  after  his  arrival,  while  still  dusty  from  the 
journey,  and  at  the  time  when  he  was  allowing  the  envoys  of  the  synod  to  wait,  held  at  his 
own  residence  a  Conciliabulum  with  his  adherents,  at  which,  first  of  all  Count  Candidian 
related  how  Cyril  and  his  friends,  in  spite  of  all  warnings,  and  in  opposition  to  the  imperial 
decrees,  had  held  a  session  five  days  before,  had  contested  his  (the  count's)  right  to  be  pres- 
ent, had  dismissed  the  bishops  sent  by  Nestorius,  and  had  paid  no  attention  to  the  letters  of 

1  Tillemont,  Minwires,  Tom.  xiv. 


EPHESUS.     A.D.  431  227 


others.  Before  he  proceeded  further,  John  of  Antioch  requested  that  the  Emperor's  edict 
of  convocation  should  be  read,  whereupon  Candidian  went  on  with  his  account  of  what  had 
taken  place,  and  in  answer  to  a  fresh  question  of  John's  declared  that  Nestorius  had  been 
condemned  unheard.  John  found  this  quite  in  keeping  with  the  disposition  of  the  synod 
since,  instead  of  receiving  him  and  his  companions  in  a  friendly  manner,  they  had  rushed 
upon  them  tumultuously  (it  was  thus  that  he  described  what  had  happened).  But  the  holy 
Synod,  which  was  now  assembled,  would  decide  what  was  proper  with  respect  to  them.  And 
this  synod,  of  which  John  speaks  in  such  grandiloquent  terms,  numbered  only  forty-three 
members,  including  himself,  while  on  the  other  side  there  were  more  than  two  hundred. 

John  then  proposed  the  question  [as  to]  what  was  to  be  decided  respecting  Cyril  and  his 
adherents  ;  and  several  who  were  not  particularly  pronounced  Nestorian  bishops  came  for- 
ward to  relate  how  Cyril  and  Memnon  of  Ephesus  had,  from  the  beginning,  maltreated 
the  Nestorians,  had  allowed  them  no  church,  and  even  on  the  festival  of  Pentecost  had  per- 
mitted them  to  hold  no  service.  Besides  Memnon  had  sent  his  clerics  into  the  residences  of 
the  bishops,  and  had  ordered  them  with  threats  to  take  part  in  his  council.  And  in  this 
way  he  and  Cyril  had  confused  everything,  so  that  their  own  heresies  might  not  be  exam- 
ined. Heresies,  such  as  the  Arian,  the  Apollinarian,  and  the  Eunomian,  were  certainly 
contained  in  the  last  letter  of  Cyril  [to  Nestorius,  along  with  the  anathematisms].  It  was 
therefore  John's  duty  to  see  to  it  that  the  heads  of  these  hei'esies  (Cyril  and  Memnon) 
should  be  suitably  punished  for  such  grave  offences,  and  that  the  bishops  who  had  been 
misguided  by  them  should  be  subjected  to  ecclesiastical  penalties. 

To  these  impudent  and  false  accusations  John  replied  with  hypocritical  meekness  "  that 
he  had  certainly  wished  that  he  should  not  be  compelled  to  exclude  from  the  Church  any 
one  who  had  been  received  into  the  sacred  priesthood,  but  diseased  members  must  cer- 
tainly be  cut  off  in  order  to  save  the  whole  body ;  and  for  this  reason  Cyril  aud  Memnon 
deserved  to  be  deposed,  because  they  had  given  occasion  to  disorders,  and  had  acted  in 
opposition  to  the  commands  of  the  Emperors,  and  besides,  were  in  the  chapters  mentioned 
[the  anathematisms]  guilty  of  heresy.  All  who  had  been  misled  by  them  were  to  be  ex- 
communicated until  they  confessed  their  error,  anathematized  the  heretical  propositions  of 
Cyril,  adhered  strictly  to  the  creed  of  Nice,  without  any  foreign  addition,  and  joined  the 
synod  of  John." 

The  assembly  approved  of  this  proposal,  and  John  then  announced  the  sentence  in  the 
following  manner  : —    . 

"  The  holy  Synod,  assembled  in  Ephesus,  by  the  grace  of  God  and  the  command  of  the 
pious  Emperors,  declares :  We  should  indeed  have  wished  to  be  able  to  hold  a  Synod  in 
peace,  but  because  you  held  a  separate  assembly  from  a  heretical,  insolent,  and  obstinate 
disposition,  although  we  were  already  in  the  neighbourhood,  and  have  filled  both  the  city 
and  the  holy  Synod  with  confusion,  in  order  to  prevent  the  examination  of  your  Apollina- 
rian, Arian,  and  Eunomian  heresies,  and  have  not  waited  for  the  arrival  of  the  holy  bishops 
of  all  regions,  and  have  also  disregarded  the  warnings  aud  admonitions  of  Candidian,  there- 
fore shall  you,  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  and  you  Memnon  of  this  place,  know  that  you  are  de- 
posed and  dismissed  from  all  sacerdotal  functions,  as  the  originators  of  the  whole  disorder, 
etc.  You  others,  who  gave  your  consent,  are  excommunicated,  until  you  acknowledge  your 
fault  and  reform,  accept  anew  the  Nicene  faith  [as  if  they  had  surrendered  it !  ]  without 
foreign  addition,  anathematize  the  heretical  propositions  of  Cyril,  and  in  all  things  comply 
with  the  command  of  the  Emperors,  who  require  a  peaceful  and  more  accurate  considera- 
tion of  the  dogma." 

This  decree  was  subscribed  by  all  the  forty- three  members  of  the  Conciliabulum  : 

The  Conciliabulum  then,  in  very  one-sided  letters  informed  the  Emperor,  the  imperial 

Q3 


228 


EPHESUS.     A.D.  431 


ladies  (the  wife  and  sister  of  the  Emperor  Theodosius  II.),  the  clergy,  the  senate,  and  the 
people  of  Constantinople,  of  all  that  had  taken  place,  and  a  little  later  once  more  required 
the  members  of  the  genuine  Synod,  in  writing,  no  longer  to  delay  the  time  for  repentance 
and  conversion,  and  to  separate  themselves  from  Cyril  and  Memnon,  etc.,  otherwise  they 
would  very  soon  be  forced  to  lament  their  own  folly. 

On  Saturday  evening  the  Conciliabulum  asked  Count  Candidian  to  take  care  that  neither 
Cyril  nor  Memnon,  nor  any  one  of  their  (excommunicated)  adherents  should  hold  divine 
service  on  Sunday.  Candidian  now  wished  that  no  member  of  either  synodal  party  should 
officiate,  but  only  the  ordinary  clergy  of  the  city  ;  but  Memnon  declared  that  he  would  in 
no  way  submit  to  John  and  his  synod,  and  Cyril  and  his  adherents  held  divine  service.  All 
the  efforts  of  John  to  appoint  by  force  another  bishop  of  Ephesus  in  the  place  of  Memnon 
were  frustrated  by  the  opposition  of  the  orthodox  inhabitants. 


CANON  II. 

If  any  provincial  bishops  were  not  present  at  the  holy  Synod  and  have  joined  or 
attempted  to  join  the  apostacy ;  or  if,  after  subscribing  the  deposition  of  Nestorius,  they 
went  back  into  the  assembly  of  apostates ;  these  men,  according  to  the  decree  of  the 
holy  Synod,  are  to  be  deposed  from  the  priesthood  and  degraded  from  their  rank. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  II. 

If  any  bishop  assents  to  or  favours  Nestorius, 
let  him  be  discharged. 

It  was  not  unnatural  that  when  it  was  seen 
that  the  Imperial  authority  was  in  favour  of 
the  Antiochene  party  that  some  of  the  clergy 
should  have  been  weak  enough  to  vacillate  in 


their  course,  the  more  so  as  the  Conciliabulum 
was  not  either  avowedly,  nor  really,  a  Nesto- 
rian  assembly,  but  one  made  up  of  those  not 
sympathizing  with  Nestorius's  heresy,  yet 
friendly  to  the  heretic  himself,  and  disapprov- 
ing of  what  they  looked  upon  as  the  uncalled- 
for  harshness  and  precipitancy  of  Cyril's 
course. 


CANON  III. 

If  any  of  the  city  or  country  clergy  have  been  inhibited  by  Nestorius  or  his  followers 
from  the  exercise  of  the  priesthood,  on  account  of  their  orthodoxy,  we  have  declared  it 
just  that  these  should  be  restored  to  their  proper  rank.  And  in  general  we  forbid  all 
the  clergy  who  adhere  to  the  Orthodox  and  Ecumenical  Synod  in  any  way  to  submit  to 
the  bishops  who  have  already  apostatized  or  shall  hereafter  apostatize. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  III. 


To  whom  Nestorius  forbids  the  priesthood,  he 
is  most  worthy  ;  but  whom  he  approves  is  pro- 
fane. 

It  would  seem  from  this  canon  that  any 
bishop  who  had  become  a  member  of  the  Con- 
ciliabulum of  John,  was  considered  as  eo  ipso 
having  lost  all  jurisdiction.  Also  it  would 
seem  that  the  clergy  were  to  disregard  the  in- 
hibition of  Nestorian  prelates  or  at  least  these 
inhibitions  were  by  some  one  to  be  removed. 
This  principle,  if  generally  applied,  would 
seem  to  be  somewhat  revolutionary. 


Lightfoot. 


(Ajjos.  Fath.  Ign.  Ad  Bom.  i.,  Vol.  II., 
Sec.  I.,  p.  191.) 

The  words  x«>po<>  ("place  "),  x<Va  ("country"), 
and  xwP<-ov  ("district"),  may  be  distinguished 
as  implying  locality,  extension,  and  limitation, 
respectively.  The  last  word  commonly  de- 
notes either  "an  estate,  a  farm,"  or  "a  fast- 
ness, a  stronghold,"  or  (as  a  mathematical 
term)  "an  area."  Here,  as  not  unfrequently 
in  later  writers,  it  is  "a  region,  a  district," 
but  the  same  fundamental  idea  is  presumed. 
The  relation  of  x%>os  to  x°>piov  is  the  same  as 
that  of  apyupos,  x/ovaos  to  apyvpiov,  xpvalov,  the 


EPHESUS.    A.D.  431 


229 


former  being  the  metals  themselves,  the  latter 
the  metals  worked  up  into  bullion  or  coins  or 


plate  or  trinkets  or  images,  e.g.  Macar.  Magn. 
Apocr.  iii.  42  (p.  147). 


CANON  IV. 

If  any  of  the  clergy  should  fall  away,  and  publicly  or  privately  presume  to  maintain 
the  doctrines  of  Nestorius  or  Celestius,  it  is  declared  just  by  the  holy  Synod  that  these 
also  should  be  deposed. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  IV. 
If  any  of  the  clergy  shall  consent  to  Cclestine1  or  Nestorius,  let  them  be  deposed. 

EXCURSUS  ON  PELAGIANISM. 

The  only  point  which  is  material  to  the  main  object  of  this  volume  is  that  Pelagius  and 
his  fellow  heretic  Celestius  were  condemned  by  the  Ecumenical  Council  of  Ephesus  for  their 
heresy.  On  this  point  there  can  be  no  possible  doubt.  And  further  than  this  the  Seventh 
Council  by  ratifying  the  Canons  of  Trullo  received  the  Canons  of  the  African  Code  which 
include  those  of  the  Carthaginian  conciliar  condemnations  of  the  Pelagian  heresy  to  which 
the  attention  of  the  reader  is  particularly  drawn.  The  condemnation  of  these  heretics  at 
Ephesus  is  said  to  have  been  due  chiefly  to  the  energy  of  St.  Augustine,  assisted  very  materi- 
ally by  a  layman  living  in  Constantinople  by  the  name  of  Marius  Mercator. 

Pelagius  and  his  heresy  have  a  sad  interest  to  us  as  he  is  said  to  have  been  born  in  Britain, 
He  was  a  monk  and  preached  at  Rome  with  great  applause  in  the  early  years  of  the  fifth 
century.  But  in  his  extreme  horror  of  Manichseism  and  Gnosticism  he  fell  into  the  opposite 
extreme ;  and  from  the  hatred  of  the  doctrine  of  the  inherent  evilness  of  humanity  he  fell 
into  the  error  of  denying  the  necessity  of  grace. 

Pelagius's  doctrines  may  be  briefly  stated  thus.  Adam's  sin  injured  only  himself,  so 
that  there  is  no  such  thing  as  original  sin.  Infants  therefore  are  not  born  in  sin  and  the 
children  of  wrath,  but  are  born  innocent,  and  only  need  baptism  so  as  to  be  knit  into  Christ, 
not  "for  the  remission  of  sins"  as  is  declared  in  the  creed.  Further  he  taught  that  man 
could  live  without  committing  any  sin  at  all.  And  for  this  there  was  no  need  of  grace  ;  in- 
deed grace  was  not  possible,  according  to  his  teaching.  The  only  "  grace,"  which  he  would 
admit  the  existence  of,  was  what  we  may  call  external  grace,  e.g.  the  example  of  Christ,  the 
teaching  of  his  ministers,  and  the  like.  Petavius''  indeed  thinks  that  he  allowed  the  activity 
of  internal  grace  to  illumine  the  intellect,  but  this  seems  quite  doubtful. 

Pelagius's  writings  have  come  down  to  us  in  a  more  or  less — generally  the  latter — pure 
form.  There  are  fourteen  books  on  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  also  a  letter  to  Demetrius  and 
his  Libellus  fidei  ad  Innocentium.  In  the  writings  of  St.  Augustine  are  found  fragments  of 
Pelagius's  writings  on  free  will. 

It  would  be  absurd  to  attempt  in  the  limits  possible  to  this  volume  to  give  any,  even 
the  most  sketchy,  treatment  of  the  doctrine  involved  in  the  Pelagian  controversy  :  the  reader 
must  be  referred  to  the  great  theologians  for  this  and  to  aid  him  I  append  a  bibliographi- 
cal table  on  the  subject. 

St.  Augustine. 

St.  Jerome. 

Marius  Mercator,  Commonitoriitm  super  nomine  Ccelestii. 

Vossius,  G.  J.,  Histor.  de  controv.  quas  Pel.  ejusque  rcliquke  moverunt. 


It  should  read  "Celestius"  ;  see  Scholion  on  Canon  I. 


2  Petav;  De  Pelag.  et  Semi-Pelag.  Hoer.,  Cap.  iv. 


230 


EPHESUS.    A.D.  431 


Noris.  Historic/,  Pelagicma. 

Gamier,  J.  JDissertat.  in  Pelag.  in  Opera  Mar.  Mercator. 

Quesnel,  Dissert,  de  cone.  Africanis  in  Pelag.  causa  celebratis  etc. 

Fuchs,  G.  D.,  Bibliothek  dcr  Kirchenversammlungen. 

Horn,  De  sentent.  Pat.  de  peccato  orig. 

Habert,  P.  L.,  TJicologice  Grcecorum  Patrum  vindicates  circa  univers.  materiam  gratice. 

Petavius,  De  Pelag.  et  Semi-Pclag.1 

The  English  works  on  the  subject  are  so  well  known  to  the  English  reader  as  to  need  no 
mention. 

As  it  is  impossible  to  treat  the  theological  question  here,  so  too  is  it  impossible  to  treat  the 
historical  question.  However  I  may  remind  the  reader  that  Nestorius  and  his  heresy  were 
defended  by  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  and  that  he  and  Celestius  were  declaimed  by  Pope  Zosi- 
mus  to  be  innocent  in  the  year  417,  a  decision  which  was  entirely  disregarded  by  the  rest  of 
the  world,  a  Carthaginian  Synod  subsequently  anathematizing  him.  Finally  the  Pope  retract- 
ed his  former  decision,  and  in  418  anathematized  him  and  his  fellow,  and  gave  notice  of  this 
in  his  "  epistola  tractoria  "  to  the  bishops.  Eighteen  Italian  bishops,  who  had  followed  the 
Pope  in  his  former  decision  of  a  twelve  month  before,  refused  to  change  their  minds  at  his  bid- 
ding now,  and  were  accordingly  deposed,  among  them  Julian  of  Eclanum.  After  this  Pelagius 
and  Celestius  found  a  fitting  harbour  of  refuge  with  Nestorius  of  Constantinople,  and  so  all 
three  were  condemned  together  by  the  council  of  Ephesus,  he  that  denied  the  incarnation 
of  the  Word,  and  they  twain  that  denied  the  necessity  of  that  incarnation  and  of  the  grace 
purchased  thereby. 

CANON  V. 

If  any  have  been  condemned  for  evil  practices  by  the  holy  Synod,  or  by  their  own 
bishops ;  and  if,  with  his  usual  lack  of  discrimination,  Nestorius  (or  his  followers)  has 
attempted,  or  shall  hereafter  attempt,  uncanonically  to  restore  such  persons  to  com- 
munion and  to  their  former  rank,  we  have  declared  that  they  shall  not  be  profited 
thereby,  but  shall  remain  deposed  nevertheless. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  V. 


If  one  condemned  by  his  bishop  is  received 
by  Nestorius  it  shall  profit  him  nothing. 

This  canon  is  interesting  as  shewing  that 
thus  early  in  the  history  of  the  Church,  it  was  I  minister. 


not  unusual  for  those  disciplined  for  their 
faults  in  one  communion  to  go  to  another  and 
there  be  welcomed  and  restored,  to  the  over- 
throw of  discipline  and  to  the  lowering  of  the 
moral   sense   of   the   people   to  whom   they 


CANON  VI. 

Likewise,  if  any  should  in  any  way  attempt  to  set  aside  the  orders  in  each  case 
made  by  the  holy  Synod  at  Ephesus,  the  holy  Synod  decrees  that,  if  they  be  bishops  or 
clergymen,  they  shall  absolutely  forfeit  their  office ;  and,  if  laymen,  that  they  shall  be 
excommunicated. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  VI. 

If  any  layman  shall  resist  the  Synod,  let  him 
be  excommunicated.  But  if  it  be  a  cleric  let  him 
be  discharged. 

How  courageous  the  passing  of  this  canon 


was  can  only  be  justly  appreciated  by  those 
who  are  familiar  with  the  weight  of  the  im- 
perial authority  at  that  day  in  ecclesiastical 
matters  and  who  will  remember  that  at  the 
very  time  this  canon  was  passed  it  was  ex- 
tremely difficult  to  say  whether  the  Emperor 
would  support  Cyril's  or  John's  synod. 


1 1  am  chiefly  indebted  to  Michaud  for  this  list. 


EPHESUS.     A.D.  431  231 


OBSERVATION  OF  THE  ROMAN  EDITORS  (Ed:  1608). 

In  the  Vatican  books  and  in  some  others  only  these  six  canons  are  found  ;  but  in  certain 
texts  there  is  added,  under  the  name  of  Canon  VII.,  the  definition  of  the  same  holy  Synod 
put  forth  after  the  Presbyter  Charisius  had  stated  his  case,  and  for  Canon  VIII.  another 
decree  of  the  synod  concerning  the  bishops  of  Cyprus. 

OBSERVATION   OF  PHILIP  LABBE,   S.J.P. 

In  the  Collections  of  John  Zonaras  and  of  Theodore  Balsamon,  also  in  the  "  Code  of  the 
Universal  Church  "  which  has  John  Tilius,  Bishop  of  St.  Brieuc  and  Christopher  Justellus 
for  its  editors,  are  found  eight  canons  of  the  Ephesine  council,  to  wit  the  six  which  are 
appended  to  the  foregoing  epistle  and  two  others  :  but  it  is  altogether  a  subject  of  wonder 
that  in  the  Codex  of  Canons,  made  for  the  Roman  Church  by  Dionysius  Exiguus,  none  of 
these  canons  are  found  at  all.  I  suppose  that  the  reason  of  this  is  that  the  Latins  saw  that 
they  were  not  decrees  affecting  the  Universal  Church,  but  that  the  Canons  set  forth  by  the 
Ephesine  fathers  dealt  merely  with  the  peculiar  and  private  matters  of  Nestorius  and  of 
his  followers. 

The  Decree  of  the  same  holy  Synod,  pronounced  after  hearing  the  Exposition  [of 
the  Faith]  by  the  Three  hundred  and  eighteen  holy  and  blessed  Fathers  in  the  city  of 
Nice,  and  the  impious  formula  composed  by  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  and  given  to  the 
same  holy  Synod  at  Ephesus  by  the  Presbyter  Charisius,  of  Philadelphia : 

CANON  VII. 

When  these  things  had  been  read,  the  holy  Synod  decreed  that  it  is  unlawful  for  any 
man  to  bring  forward,  or  to  write,  or  to  compose  a  different  {erepav)  Faith  as  a  rival  to 
that  established  by  the  holy  Fathers  assembled  with  the  Holy  Ghost  in  Nicaea. 

But  those  who  shall  dare  to  compose  a  different  faith,  or  to  introduce  or  offer  it  to 
persons  desiring  to  turn  to  the  acknowledgment  of  the  truth,  whether  from  Heathenism 
or  from  Judaism,  or  from  any  heresy  whatsoever,  shall  be  deposed,  if  they  be  bishops 
or  clergymen ;  bishops  from  the  episcopate  and  clergymen  from  the  clergy  ;  and  if  they 
be  laymen,  they  shall  be  anathematized. 

And  in  like  manner,  if  any,  whether  bishops,  clergymen,  or  laymen,  should  be  dis- 
covered to  hold  or  teach  the  doctrines  contained  in  the  Exposition  introduced  by  the 
Presbyter  Charisius  concerning  the  Incarnation  of  the  Only-Begotten  Son  of  God,  or  the 
abominable  and  profane  doctrines  of  Nestorius,  which  are  subjoined,  they  shall  be  sub- 
jected to  the  sentence  of  this  holy  and  ecumenical  Synod.  So  that,  if  it  be  a  bishop,  he 
shall  be  removed  from  his  bishopric  and  degraded ;  if  it  be  a  clergyman,  he  shall  likewise 
be  stricken  from  the  clergy ;  and  if  it  be  a  layman,  he  shall  be  anathematized,  as  has  been 
afore  said. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VII.  Bevekidge. 

Any  bishop  who  sets  forth  a  faith  other  than  "When  these  things  had  been  read."  Bal- 
that  of  Nice  shall  be  an  alien  from  the  Church:  |  samon  here  makes  an  egregious  mistake,  for 
if  a  layman  do  so  let  him  be  cast  out.  j  it  was  not  after  the  reading  of  the  decree  of 

this  council  and  of  the  Nicene  Creed,  that  this 


The  heading  is  that  found  in  the  ordinary 
Greek  texts.  The  canon  itself  is  found  verba- 
tim in  the  Acts — Actio  VI.  (Labbe  and  Cos- 
Bart,  Concilia,  Tom.  III.,  col.  689.) 


canon  was  set  forth,  as  Balsamon  affirms  ;  but 
after  the  reading  of  the  libcllum  of  Charisius, 
and  of  the  Nestorian  Creed,  as  is  abundantly 
evident  from  what  we  read  in  the  Acts  of  the 


232  EPHESUS.     A.D.  431 


council.  From  this  it  is  clear  that  Balsamon  but  as  a  matter  of  fact  exhibited  to  the  synod 
had  never  seen  the  Acts  of  this  council,  or  at  j  his  libellum  written  against  Nestorius  ;  in 
least  had  never  carefully  studied  them,  else  he  j  which  so  far  from  asserting  that  Nestorius 
could  not  have  written  such  a  comment.  was  orthodox,  he  distinctly  calls  him  kclkoSo&s. 

[With  regard  to  Charisius,  Balsamon]  makes  j 
another  mistake.     For  not  only  did  this  pres-  \      Photius  has  included  this  canon  in  his  No- 
byter  not  follow  the  evil  opinions  of  Nestorius,  I  mocanons,  Title  I.,  cap.  j. 

EXCURSUS   ON  THE   WORDS   irla-rw  eirepav. 

It  has  been  held  by  some  and  was  urged  by  the  Greeks  at  the  Council  of  Florence,1  and 
often  before  and  since,  as  well  as  by  Pope  Leo  III.,  in  answer  to  the  ambassadors  of  Charle- 
magne, that  the  prohibition  of  the  Council  of  Ephesus  to  make,  hold,  or  teach  any  other  faith 
than  that  of  Nice  forbade  anyone,  even  a  subsequent  General  Council,  to  add  anything  to  the 
creed.  This  interjn'etation  seems  to  be  shewn  to  be  incorrect  from  the  following  circum- 
stances. 

1.  That  the  prohibition  was  passed  by  the  Council  immediately  after  it  had  heard  Chari- 
sius read  his  creed,  which  it  had  approved,  and  on  the  strength  of  which  it  had  received  its 
author,  and  after  the  reading  of  a  Nestorian  creed  which  it  condemned.  From  this  it  seems 
clear  that  krepav  must  mean  "different,"  "contradictory,"  and  not  "another"  in  the  sense  of 
mere  explanatory  additions  to  the  already  existing  creed. 

(E.  B.  Pusey,  On  the  Clause  "and  the  Son,"  p.  81.) 
St.  Cyril  ought  to  understand  the  canon,  which  he  probably  himself  framed,  as  presiding 
over  the  Council  of  Ephesus,  as  Archbishop  of  Alexandria  and  representative  of  Celestine, 
Bishop  of  Rome.  His  signature  immediately  succeeds  the  Canon.  We  can  hardly  think 
that  we  understand  it  better  than  he  who  probably  framed  it,  nay  who  presided  over  the 
Council  which  passed  it.  He,  however,  explained  that  what  was  not  against  the  Creed  was 
not  beside  it.  The  Orientals  had  proposed  to  him,  as  terms  of  communion,  that  he  should 
"  do  away  with  all  he  had  written  in  epistles,  tomes,  or  books,  and  agree  with  that  only  faith 
which  had  been  defined  by  our  holy  Fathers  at  Nice."  But,  St.  Cyril  wrote  back:  "We 
all  follow  that  exposition  of  faith  which  was  defined  by  the  holy  fathers  in  the  city  of  Nice, 
sapping  absolutely  nothing  of  the  things  contained  in  it.  For  they  are  all  right  and  unex- 
ceptionable ;  and  anything  curious,  after  it,  is  not  safe.  But  what  I  have  rightly  written 
against  the  blasphemies  of  Nestorius  no  words  will  persuade  me  to  say  that  they  were  not 
done  well :"  and  against  the  imputation  that  he  "had  received  an  exposition  of  faith  or  new 
Creed,  as  dishonouring  that  old  and  venerable  Creed,"  he  says  : 

"  Neither  have  we  demanded  of  any  an  exposition  of  faith,  nor  have  we  received  one  newly 
framed  by  others.  For  Divine  Scripture  suffices  us,  and  the  prudence  of  the  holy  fathers, 
and  the  symbol  of  faith,  framed  perfectly  as  to  all  right  doctrine.  But  since  the  most  holy 
Eastern  Bishops  differed  from  us  as  to  that  of  Ephesus  and  were  somehow  suspected  of 
being  entangled  in  the  meshes  of  Nestorius,  therefore  they  very  wisely  made  a  defence,  to 
free  themselves  from  blame,  and  eager  to  satisfy  the  lovers  of  the  blameless  faith  that  they 
were  minded  to  have  no  share  in  his  impiety  ;  and  the  thing  is  far  from  all  note  of  blame. 
If  Nestorius  himself,  when  we  all  held  out  to  him  that  he  ought  to  condemn  his  own  dog- 
mas and  choose  the  truth  instead  thereof,  had  made  a  written  confession  thereon,  who  would 
say  that  he  framed  for  us  a  new  exposition  of  faith  ?  Why  then  do  they  calumniate  the 
assent  of  the  most  holy  Bishops  of  Phoenicia,  calling  it  a  new  setting  forth  of  the  Creed, 
whereas  they  made  it  for  a  good  and  necessary  end,  to  defend  themselves  and  soothe  those 

>  Hefele,  Concilicngesch.  XLVHI.,  §  810. 


EPHESUS. -A.D."  431-  233 


who  thought  that  they  followed  the  innovations  of  Nestorius  ?  For  the  holy  Ecumenical 
Synod  gathered  at  Ephesus  provided,  of  necessity,  that  no  other  exposition  of  faith  besides 
that  which  existed,  which  the  most  blessed  fathers,  speaking  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  defined, 
should  be  brought  into  the  Churches  of  God.  But  they  who  at  one  time,  I  know  not  how, 
differed  from  it,  and  were  suspected  of  not  being  right-minded,  following  the  Apostolic  and 
Evangelic  doctrines,  how  should  they  free  themselves  from  this  ill-report?  by  silence?  or 
rather  by  self-defence,  and  by  manifesting  the  power  of  the  faith  which  was  in  them?  The 
divine  disciple  wrote,  "be  ready  always  to  give  an  answer  to  every  one  who  asketh  you  an 
account  of  the  hope  which  is  in  you."  But  he  who  willeth  to  do  this,  innovates  in  nothing, 
nor  doth  he  frame  any  new  exposition  of  faith,  but  rather  maketh  plain  to  those  who  ask 
him,  what  faith  he  hath  concerning  Christ."1 

2.  The  fathers  of  the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  by  their  practice,  are  authoritative  expo- 
nents of  the  Canon  of  Ephesus.  For  they  renewed  the  prohibition  of  the  Council  of  Ephesus 
to  "adduce  any  other  faith,"  but,  in  "the  faith"  which  is  not  to  be  set  aside,  they  included 
not  only  the  Creeds  of  Nice  and  Constantinople,  but  the  definitions  at  Ephesus  and  Chalce- 
don itself.  The  statements  of  the  faith  were  expanded,  because  fresh  contradictions  of  the 
faith  had  emerged.  After  directing  that  both  Creeds  should  be  read,  the  Council  says, 
"  This  wise  and  saving  Symbol  of  Divine  grace  would  have  sufficed  to  the  full  knowledge 
and  confirmation  of  the  faith  ;  for  it  teaches  thoroughly  the  perfect  truth  of  the  Father, 
Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  and  presents  to  those  who  receive  it  faithfully  the  Incarnation  of  the 
Lord."  Then,  having  in  detail  shewn  how  both  heresies  were  confuted  by  it,  and  having 
set  forth  the  true  doctrine,  they  sum  up, 

"  These  things  being  framed  by  us  with  all  accuracy  and  care  on  every  side,  the  holy 
and  ecumenical  Synod  defines,  that  it  shall  be  lawful  for  no  one  to  produce  or  compose,  or 
put  together,  or  hold,  or  teach  others  another  faith,  and  those  who  venture,  etc."  (as  in  the 
Council  of  Ephesus). 

The  Council  of  Chalcedon  enlarged  greatly  the  terms  although  not  the  substance  of  the 
faith  contained  in  the  Nicene  Creed ;  and  that,  in  view  of  the  heresies,  which  had  since 
arisen ;  and  yet  renewed  in  terms  the  prohibition  of  the  Canon  of  Ephesus  and  the  penalties 
annexed  to  its  infringement.  It  shewed,  then,  in  practice,  that  it  did  not  hold  the  enlarge- 
ment of  the  things  proposed  as  de  fide  to  be  prohibited,  but  only  the  producing  of  things 
contradictory  to  the  faith  once  delivered  to  the  saints.  Its  prohibition,  moreover,  to  "  hold  " 
another  faith  shews  the  more  that  they  meant  only  to  prohibit  any  contradictory  statement 
of  faith.  For  if  they  had  prohibited  any  additional  statement  not  being  a  contradiction  of 
its  truth,  then  (as  Cardinal  Julian  acutely  argued  in  the  Council  of  Florence),  any  one  would 
fall  under  its  anathema,  who  held  (as  all  must)  anything  not  expressed  in  set  terms  in  the 
Nicene  Creed  ;  such  as  that  God  is  eternal  or  incomprehensible. 

It  may  not  be  amiss  to  remember  that  the  argument  that  -k'uttiv  hipav  forbids  any  addition 
to  the  Creed  or  any  further  definition  of  the  faith,  was  that  urged  by  the  heretics  at  the 
Latrocinium,  and  the  orthodox  were  there  condemned  on  the  ground  that  they  had  added  to 
the  faith  and  laid  themselves  under  the  Anathema  of  Ephesus.  How  far  this  interpretation 
was  from  being  that  of  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  is  evinced  by  the  fact  that  it  immediately  de- 
clared that  St.  Flavian  and  Bishop  Eusebius  had  been  unjustly  deposed,  and  proceeded  to  de- 
pose those  who  had  deposed  them.  After  stating  these  facts  Dr.  Pusey  remarks,  "  Protestants 
may  reject  consistently  the  authority  of  all  councils  ;  but  on  what  grounds  any  who  accept 
their  authority  can  insist  on  their  own  private  interpretation  of  a  canon  of  one  council  against 
the  authority  of  another  General  Council  which  rejected  that  interpretation,  I  see  not."2 

1  Cyril.  Alex.,  Up.  xxxv.,  Ad  Aeac.  Melit.  =  E.  B.  Pusey,  Lib,  til.,  p.  86. 


234  EPHESUS.     A.D.  431 


4.  The  Fifth  Ecumenical  Council,  the  Second  of  Constantinople,  received  both  the  creeds 
of  Nice  and  that  of  Constantinople,  as  well  of  the  definitions  of  Ephesus  and  Chalcedon, 
and  yet  at  the  end  of  the  fourth  Session  we  find  in  the  acts  that  the  fathers  cried  out,  with 
respect  to  the  creed  of  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia:  "  This  creed  Satan  composed.  Anathema 
to  him  that  composed  this  creed !  The  First  Council  of  Ephesus  anathematized  this  creed 
and  its  author.  We  know  only  one  symbol  of  faith,  that  which  the  holy  fathers  of  Nice  set 
forth  and  handed  down.  This  also  the  three  holy  Synods  handed  down.  Into  this  we  were 
baptized,  and  into  this  we  baptize,  etc.,  etc."  J 

From  this  it  is  clearer  than  day  that  these  fathers  looked  upon  the  creed  of  Constantinople, 
with  its  additions,  to  be  yet  the  same  creed  as  that  of  Nice. 

(Le  Quien,  Diss.  Dam.,  n.  37.) 

In  the  Sixth  Council  also,  no  one  objecting,  Peter  of  Nicomedia,  Theodore,  and  other 
bishops,  clerks,  and  monks,  who  had  embraced  the  Monothelite  heresy,  openly  recited  a 
Creed  longer  and  fuller  than  the  Nicene. 

In  the  Seventh  Synod  also,  another  was  read  written  by  Theodore  of  Jerusalem  :  and  again, 
Basil  of  Ancyra,  and  the  other  Bishops,  who  had  embraced  the  errors  of  the  Iconoclasts, 
again  offered  another,  although  the  Canon  of  Ephesus  pronounced,  that  "  it  should  not  be 
lawful  to  offer  to  heretics,  who  wished  to  be  converted  to  the  Church,  any  other  creed  than 
the  Nicene."  In  this  same  Synod,  was  read  another  profession  of  faith,  which  Tara- 
sius  had  sent  to  the  Patriarchs  of  the  Eastern  sees.  It  contains  the  Nicene,  or  Constanti- 
nopolitan  Creed,  variously  enlarged  and  interpolated.  But  of  the  Holy  Spirit  it  has  specifi- 
cally this  :  "  And  in  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  Lord,  the  Giver  of  Life,  which  proceedeth  from  the 
Father  through  the  Son."  But  since  the  Greeks  at  the  Council  of  Florence  said,  that  these 
were  individual,  not  common,  formulae  of  faith,  here  are  others,  which  are  plainly  common 
and  solemn,  which  are  contained  in  their  own  rituals.  They  do  not  baptize  a  Hebrew  or 
a  Jew,  until  he  have  pronounced  a  profession  of  Christian  Faith,  altogether  different  from 
the  Creed  of  Constantinople,  as  may  be  seen  in  the  Euchologion.  In  the  consecration  of  a 
Bishop,  the  Bishop  elect  is  first  bidden  to  recite  the  Creed  of  Constantinople  ;  and  then,  as 
if  this  did  not  suffice,  a  second  and  a  third  are  demanded  of  him ;  of  which  the  last  contains 
that  aforesaid  symbol,  intermingled  with  various  declarations.  Nay,  Photius  himself  is  pointed 
out  to  be  the  author  of  this  interpolated  symbol.2  I  pass  by  other  formulae,  which  the 
Greeks  have  framed  for  those  who  return  to  the  Church  from  divers  heresies  or  sects,  although 
the  terms  of  the  Canon  of  Ephesus  are,  that  "it  is  unlawful  to  propose  any  other  faith  to 
those  who  wish  to  be  converted  to  the  Church,  from  heathenism,  or  Judaism,  or  any  heresy 
whatever." 

The  Judgment  of  the  same  Holy  Synod,  pronounced  on  the  petition  presented  to  it 
by  the  Bishops  of  Cyprus  : 

CANON  VIII. 

Our  brother  bishop  Rheginus,  the  beloved  of  God,  and  his  fellow  beloved  of  God 
bishops,  Zeno  and  Evagrius,  of  the  Province  of  Cyprus,  have  reported  to  us  an  innova- 
tion which  has  been  introduced  contrary  to  the  ecclessiastical  constitutions  and  the 
Canons  of  the  Holy  Apostles,  and  which  touches  the  liberties  of  all.  Wherefore,  since 
injuries  affecting  all  require  the  more  attention,  as  they  cause  the  greater  damage,  and 
particularly  when  they  are  transgressions  of  an  ancient  custom  ;  and  since  those  excel- 
lent men,  who  have  petitioned  the  Synod,  have  told  us  in  writing  and  by  word  of  mouth 

1  Labbe  and Cossart,  Tom.  v.,  col.  455. 

a  In  the  Codex  Coesareus,  mentioned  by  Lambecins,  Lib.  vii.,  cod.  77. 


EPHESUS.     A.D.  431 


235 


that  the  Bishop  of  Antioch  has  in  this  way  held  ordinations  in  Cyprus  ;  therefore  the 
Rulers  of  the  holy  churches  in  Cyprus  shall  enjoy,  without  dispute  or  injury,  according 
to  the  Canons  of  the  blessed  Fathers  and  ancient  custom,  the  right  of  performing  for 
themselves  the  ordination  of  their  excellent  Bishops.  The  same  rule  shall  be  observed 
in  the  other  dioceses  and  provinces  everywhere,  so  that  none  of  the  God-beloved 
Bishops  shall  assume  control  of  any  province  which  has  not  heretofore,  from  the  very 
beginning,  been  under  his  own  hand  or  that  of  his  predecessors.  But  if  any  one  has 
violently  taken  and  subjected  [a  Province],  he  shall  give  it  up;  lest  the  Canons  of 
the  Fathers  be  transgressed ;  or  the  vanities  of  worldly  honour  be  brought  in  under 
pretext  of  sacred  office ;  or  we  lose,  without  knowing  it,  little  by  little,  the  liberty  which 
Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Deliverer  of  all  men,  hath  given  us  by  his  own  Blood. 

Wherefore,  this  holy  and  ecumenical  Synod  has  decreed  that  in  every  province  the 
rights  which  heretofore,  from  the  beginning,  have  belonged  to  it,  shall  be  preserved  to 
it,  according  to  the  old  prevailing  custom,  unchanged  and  uninjured :  every  Metro- 
politan having  permission  to  take,  for  his  own  security,  a  copy  of  these  acts.  And  if  any 
one  shall  bring  forward  a  rule  contrary  to  what  is  here  determined,  this  holy  and  ecu- 
menical Synod  unanimously  decrees  that  it  shall  be  of  no  effect. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VIII. 


Let  the  rights  of  each  province  be  preserved 
pure  and  inviolate.  No  attempt  to  introduce 
any  form  contrary  to  these  shall  be  of  any  avail. 

The  caption  is  the  one  given  in  the  ordi- 
nary Greek  texts.  The  canon  is  found  word 
for  word  in  the  VII  Session  of  the  Council, 
with  the  heading,  "  A  decree  of  the  same 
holy  Synod."  (Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia, 
Tom.  III.,  col.  802.) 

I  have  followed  in  reading  "  the  Canons  of 
the  Holy  Apostles  "  the  reading  in  Balsamon 
and  Zonaras,  and  that  of  Elias  Ehingerus 
Augustanus  (so  says  Beveridge)  in  his  edition 
of  the  Greek  canons,  a.d.  1614.  But  the 
Bodleian  MS.  and  John  of  Antioch  in  his 
collection  of  the  Canons,  and  the  Codex 
edited  by  Christopher  Justellus  read  "  of 
the  Holy  Fathers  "  instead  of  "  of  the  Holy 
Apostles."  Beveridge  is  of  opinion  that  this 
is  the  truer  reading,  for  while  no  doubt  the 
Ephesine  Fathers  had  in  mind  the  Apostolic 
Canons,  yet  they  seem  to  have  more  particu- 
larly referred  in  this  place  to  the  canons  of 
Nice.  And  this  seems  to  be  intimated  in 
the  libellum  of  the  Bishops  of  Cyprus,  who 
gave  rise  to  this  very  decree,  in  which  the 
condemned  practice  is  said  to  be  "  contrary 


to  the  Apostolic  Canons  and  to  the  defini- 
tions of  the  most  holy  Council  of  Nice." 

This  canon  Photius  does  not  recognize,  for 
in  the  Preface  to  his  Nomocanon  he  distinct- 
ly writes  that  there  were  but  seven  canons 
adopted  by  the  Ephesine  Synod,  and  in  the 
first  chapter  of  the  first  title  he  cites  the  pre- 
ceding canon  as  the  seventh,  that  is  the  last. 
John  of  Antioch  likewise  says  that  there  are 
but  seven  canons  of  Ephesus,  but  reckons 
this  present  canon  as  the  seventh,  from  which 
Beveridge  concludes  that  he  rejects  the  Canon 
concerning  Charisius  (vij). 

Beveridge. 

Concerning  the  present  canon,  of  rather 
decree,  the  Bishop  of  Antioch,  who  had  given 
occasion  to  the  six  former  canons,  gave  also 
occasion  for  the  enacting  of  this,  by  arroga- 
ting to  himself  the  right  of  ordaining  in  the 
Island  of  Cyprus,  in  violation  of  former 
usage.  After  the  bishops  of  that  island,  who 
are  mentioned  in  the  canon,  had  presented 
their  statements  (libellum)  to  the  Synod,  the 
present  decree  was  set  forth,  in  which  warn- 
ing was  given  that  no  innovation  should  be 
tolerated  in  Ecclesiastical  administration, 
whether  in  Cyprus  or  elsewhere ;  but  that  in 
all  Dioceses  and  Provinces  their  ancient 
rights  and  privileges  should  be  preserved. 


THE  LETTER  OF  THE  SAME  HOLY  SYNOD  OF  EPHESUS,  TO 
THE  SACRED  SYNOD  IN  PAMPHYLIA  CONCERNING  EUS- 
TATHIUS WHO  HAD  BEEN   THEIR  METROPOLITAN. 

(Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tome  III.,  col.  806.) 


Forasmuch  as  the  divinely  inspired 
Scripture  says,  "Do  all  things  with  ad- 
vice,"1 it  is  especially  their  duty  who  have 
had  the  priestly  ministry  allotted  to  them 
to  examine  with  all  diligence  whatever  mat- 
ters are  to  be  transacted.  For  to  those  who 
will  so  spend  their  lives,  it  comes  to  pass 
both  that  they  are  established  in  [the  enjoy- 
ment of]  an  honest  hope  concerning  what 
belongs  to  them,  and  that  they  are  borne 
along,  as  by  a  favouring  breeze,  in  things 
that  they  desire :  so  that,  in  truth,  the  say- 
ing [of  the  Scripture]  has  much  reason  [to 
commend  it].  But  there  are  times  when 
bitter  and  intolerable  grief  swoops  down 
upon  the  mind,  and  has  the  effect  of  cruelly 
beclouding  it,  so  as  to  carry  it  away  from 
the  pursuit  of  what  is  needful,  and  persuade 
it  to  consider  that  to  be  of  service  which  is 
in  its  [very]  nature  mischievous.  Some- 
thing of  this  kind  we  have  seen  endured 
by  that  most  excellent  and  most  religious 
Bishop  Eustathius.  For  it  is  in  evidence 
that  he  has  been  ordained  canonically  ;  but 
having  been  much  disturbed,  as  he  declares, 
by  certain  parties,  and  having  entered  upon 
circumstances  he  had  not  foreseen,  there- 
fore, though  fully  able  to  repel  the  slanders 
of  his  persecutors,  he  nevertheless,  through 
an  extraordinary  inexperience  of  affairs,  de- 
clined to  battle  with  the  difficulties  which 
beset  him,  and  in  some  way  that  we  know 
not  set  forth  an  act  of  resignation.  Yet  it 
behooved  him,  when  he  had  been  once  en- 
trusted with  the  priestly  care,  to  cling  to  it 
with  spiritual  energy,  and,  as  it  were,  to 
strip  himself  to  strive  against  the  troubles 
and  gladly  to  endure  the  sweat  for  which 
he  had  bargained.  But  inasmuch  as  he 
proved  himself  to  be  deficient  in  practical 
capacity,  having  met  with  this  misfortune 
rather  from  inexperience  than  from  cow- 
ardice and  sloth,  your  holiness  has  of  neces- 
sity ordained  our  most  excellent  and  most 
religious  brother  and  fellow-bishop,  Theo- 
dore, as  the  overseer  of  the  Church  ;  for  it 


was  not  reasonable  that  it  should  remain  in 
widowhood,  and  that  the  Saviour's  sheep 
should  pass  their  time  without  a  shepherd. 
But  when  he  came  to  us  weeping,  not  con- 
tending with  the  aforenamed  most  religious 
Bishop  Theodore  for  his  See  or  Church,  but 
in  the  meantime  seeking  only  for  his  rank 
and  title  as  a  bishop,  we  all  suffered  with 
the  old  man  in  his  grief,  and  considering 
his  weeping  as  our  own,  we  hastened  to  dis- 
cover whether  the  aforenamed  [Eustathius] 
had  been  subjected  to  a  legal  deposition,  or 
whether,  forsooth,  he  had  been  convicted  on 
any  of  the  absurd  charges  alleged  by  certain 
parties  who  had  poured  forth  idle  gossip 
against  his  reputation.  And  indeed  we 
learned  that  nothing  of  such  a  kind  had 
taken  place,  but  rather  that  his  resignation 
had  been  counted  against  the  said  Eusta- 
thius instead  of  a  [regular]  indictment. 
Wherefore,  we  did  by  no  means  blame  your 
i  holiness  for  being  compelled  to  ordain  into 
!  his  place  the  aforenamed  most  excellent 
j  Bishop  Theodore.  But  forasmuch  as  it  was 
not  seemly  to  contend  much  against  the 
unpractical  character  of  the  man,  while  it 
was  rather  necessary  to  have  pity  on  the 
elder  who,  at  so  advanced  an  age,  was  now 
so  far  away  from  the  city  which  had  given 
him  birth,  and  from  the  dwelling-places  of 
his  fathers,  we  have  judicially  pronounced 
and  decreed  without  any  opposition,  that  he 
shall  have  both  the  name,  and  the  rank,  and 
the  communion  of  the  episcopate.  On  this 
|  condition,  however,  only,  that  he  shall  not 
|  ordain,  and  that  he  shall  not  take  and  min- 
ister to  a  Church  of  his  own  individual  au- 
thority; but  that  [he  shall  do  so  only]  if 
taken  as  an  assistant,  or  when  appointed, 
if  it  should  so  chance,  by  a  brother  and 
fellow-bishop,  in  accordance  with  the  ordi- 
nance and  the  love  which  is  in  Christ.  If, 
however,  ye  shall  determine  anything  more 
favourable  towards  him,  either  now  or  here- 
after, this  also  will  be  pleasing  to  the  Holy 
Synod. 


1  Ecclesiasticus,  xxxii.,  19—"  Do  nothing  without  advice  "  {sine  consilio  nihil  facias) :  The  deutero-canonical  book  of  Ecclesiasti- 
cus  is  here  by  an  Ecumenical  Council  Btyled  "divinely  inspired  Scripture." 


THE  LETTER  OF  THE  SYNOD  TO  POPE  CELESTINE, 


(Labbe  andCossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  III.,  col.  659 ;  also  in  Migne,  Pat.  Lat.  [reprinted 
from  Galland.,  Vett.  Pair.,  Tom.  ix.],  Tom.  L.,  Ep.  xx.,  col.  511.) 


The  Kelation  which  the  Holy  Council 
op  Ephesus  sent  to  Pope  Celestine; 
in  which  are  explained  What  Things 
were  Done  in  that  Holy  and  Great 
Council. 

The  Holy  Synod  which  by  the  grace  of 
God  was  assembled  at  Ephesus  the  Metro- 
polis to  the  most  holy  and  our  fellow-min- 
ister Coelestine,  health  in  the  Lord. 

The  zeal  of  your  holiness  for  piety,  and 
your  care  for  the  right  faith,  so  grateful  and 
highly  pleasing  to  God  the  Saviour  of  us 
all,  are  worthy  of  all  admiration.  For  it  is 
your  custom  in  such  great  matters  to  make 
trial  of  all  things,  and  the  confirmation  of 
the  Churches  you  have  made  your  own  care. 
But  since  it  is  right  that  all  things  which 
have  taken  place  should  be  brought  to  the 
knowledge  of  your  holiness,  we  are  writing 
of  necessity  [to  inform  you]  that,  by  the 
will  of  Christ  the  Saviour  of  us  all,  and  in 
accordance  with  the  orders  of  the  most 
pious  and  Christ-loving  Emperors,  we  as- 
sembled together  in  the  Metropolis  of  the 
Ephesians  from  many  and  far  scattered 
regions,  being  in  all  over  two  hundred 
bishops.  Then,  in  accordance  with  the  de- 
crees of  the  Christ-loving  Emperors  by 
whom  we  were  assembled,  we  fixed  the  date 
of  the  meeting  of  the  holy  Synod  as  the 
Feast  of  the  Holy  Pentecost,  all  agreeing 
thereto,  especially  as  it  was  contained  in 
the  letters  of  the  Emperors  that  if  anyone 
did  not  arrive  at  the  appointed  time,  he 
was  absent  with  no  good  conscience,  and 
was  inexcusable  both  before  God  and  man. 
The  most  reverend  John  bishop  of  Antioch 
stopped  behind ;  not  in  singleness  of  heart, 
nor  because  the  length  of  the  journey  made 
the  impediment,  but  hiding  in  his  mind 
his  plan  and  his  thought  (which  was  so 
displeasing  to  God,)  [a  plan  and  thought] 
which  he  made  clear  when  not  long  after- 
wards he  arrived  at  Ephesus. 

Therefore  we  put  off  the  assembling  [of 
the  council]  after  the  appointed  day  of  the 
Holy  Pentecost  for  sixteen  whole  days  ;  in 


the  meanwhile  many  of  the  bishops  and 
clerics  were  overtaken  with  illness,  and 
much  burdened  by  the  expense,  and  some 
even  died.  A  great  injury  was  thus  being- 
done  to  the  great  Synod,  as  your  holiness 
easily  perceives.  For  he  used  perversely 
such  long  delay  that  many  from  much 
greater  distances  arrived  before  him. 

Nevertheless  after  sixteen  days  had 
passed,  certain  of  the  bishops  who  were 
with  him,  to  wit,  two  Metropolitans,  the 
one  Alexander  of  Apamea,  and  the  other 
Alexander  of  Hierapolis,  arrived  before 
him.  And  when  we  complained  of  the 
tardy  coming  of  the  most  reverend  bishop 
John,  not  once,  but  often,  we  were  told, 
"  He  gave  us  command  to  announce  to  your 
reverence,  that  if  anything  should  happen 
to  delay  him,  not  to  put  off  the  Synod,  but 
to  do  what  was  right."  After  having  re- 
ceived this  message, — and  as  it  was  mani- 
fest, as  well  from  his  delay  as  from  the 
announcements  just  made  to  us,  that  he  re- 
fused to  attend  the  Council,  whether  out  of 
friendship  to  Nestorius,  or  because  he  had 
been  a  cleric  of  a  church  under  his  sway,  or 
out  of  regard  to  petitions  made  by  some  in 
his  favour, — the  Holy  Council  sat  in  the 
great  church  of  Ephesus,  which  bears  the 
name  of  Mary. 

But  when  all  with  zeal  had  come  together, 
Nestorius  alone  was  found  missing  from  the 
council,  thereupon  the  holy  Synod  sent  him 
admonition  in  accordance  with  the  canons 
by  bishops,  a  first,  second,  and  third  time. 
But  he  surrounding  his  house  with  soldiers, 
set  himself  up  against  the  ecclesiastical  laws, 
neither  did  he  shew  himself,  nor  give  any 
satisfaction  for  his  iniquitous  blasphemies. 

After  this  the  letters  were  read  which 
were  written  to  him  by  the  most  holy  and 
most  reverend  bishop  of  the  Church  of 
Alexandria,  Cyril,  which  the  Holy  Synod 
approved  as  being  orthodox  and  without 
fault  (opS-cos  koI  a?uj7rT&)?  e%etv),  and  in  no 
point  out  of  agreement  either  with  the  di- 
vinely inspired  Scriptures,  or  with  the  faith 
handed  down  and  set  forth  in  the  great 
synod  of  holy  Fathers,  which  assembled 


238 


EPHESUS.    A.D.  431 


sometime  ago  at  Nice  in  Bithynia,  as  your 
holiness  also  rightly  having  examined  this 
has  given  witness. 

On  the  other  hand  there  was  read  the  j 
letter  of  Nestorius,  which  was  written  to  j 
the  already  mentioned  most  holy  and  rev-  j 
erend  brother  of  ours  and  fellow-minister, 
Cyril,  and  the  Holy  Synod  was  of  opinion 
that  those  things  which  were  taught  in  it 
were  wholly  alien  from  the  Apostolic  and 
Evangelical   faith,   sick    with    many    and 
strange  blasphemies. 

His  most  impious  expositions  were  like- 
wise read,  and  also  the  letter  written  to 
him  by  your  holiness,  in  which  he  was 
properly  condemned  as  one  who  had  writ- 
ten blasphemy  and  had  inserted  irreligious 
views  (<£<ura?)  in  his  private  exegesis,  and 
after  this  a  just  sentence  of  deposition  was 
pronounced  against  him  ;  especially  is  this 
sentence  just,  because  he  is  so  far  removed 
from  being  penitent,  or  from  a  confession 
of  the  matters  in  which  he  blasphemed, 
while  yet  he  had  the  Church  of  Constanti- 
nople, that  even  in  the  very  metropolis  of 
the  Ephesians,  he  delivered  a  sermon  to 
certain  of  the  Metropolitical  bishops,  men 
who  were  not  ignorant,  but  learned  and 
God-fearing,  in  which  he  was  bold  enough 
to  say,  "I  do  not  confess  a  two  or  three 
months  old  God,"  and  he  said  other  things 
more  outrageous  than  this. 

Therefore  as  an  impious  and  most  pesti- 
lent heresy,  which  perverts  our  most  pure 
religion  (^prjaKelav)  and  which  overthrows 
from  the  foundation  the  whole  economy  of 
the  mystery  [i.e.  the  Incarnation],  we  cast 
it  down,  as  we  have  said  above.  But  it  was 
not  possible,  as  it  seemed,  that  those  who 
had  the  sincere  love  of  Christ,  and  were 
zealous  in  the  Lord  should  not  experience 
many  trials.  Eor  we  had  hoped  that  the 
most  reverend  John,  bishop  of  Antioch 
would  have  praised  the  sedulous  care  and 
piety  of  the  Synod,  and  that  perchance  he 
would  have  blamed  the  slowness  of  Nesto- 
rius's  deposition.  But  all  things  turned 
out  contrary  to  our  hope.  Eor  he  was 
found  to  be  an  enemy,  and  a  most  warlike 
one,  to  the  holy  Synod,  and  even  to  the 
orthodox  faith  of  the  churches,  as  these 
things  indicate. 

Eor  as  soon  as  he  was  come  to  Ephesus, 
before  he  had  even  shaken  off  the  dust  of 
the  journey,  or  changed  his  travelling  dress, 
he  assembled  those  who  had  sided  with 


Nestorius  and  who  had  uttered  blasphemies 
against  their  head,  and  only  not  derided  the 
glory  of  Christ,  and  gathering  as  a  college 
to  himself,  I  suppose,  thirty  men,  having 
the  name  of  bishops  (some  of  whom  were 
without  sees,  wandering  about  and  having 
no  dioceses,  others  again  had  for  many 
3*ears  been  deposed  for  serious  causes  from 
their  metropolises,  and  with  these  were  Pe- 
lagians and  the  followers  of  Celestius,  and 
some  of  those  who  were  turned  out  of  Thes- 
saly),  he  had  the  presumption  to  commit 
a  piece  of  iniquity  no  man  had  ever  done 
before.  For  all  by  himself  he  drew  up  a 
paper  which  he  called  a  deposition,  and  re- 
viled and  reproached  the  most  holy  and  rev- 
erend Cyril,  bishop  of  Alexandria,  and  the 
most  reverend  Memnon,  bishop  of  Ephesus, 
our  brother,  and  fellow-minister,  none  of  us 
knowing  anything  about  it,  and  not  even 
those  who  were  thus  reviling  knew  what 
was  being  done,  nor  for  what  reason  they 
had  presumed  to  do  this.  But  ignoring 
the  anger  of  God  for  such  behaviour,  and 
unheeding  the  ecclesiastical  canons,  and 
forgetting  that  they  were  hastening  to  de- 
struction by  such  a  course  of  action,  under 
the  name  of  an  excommunication,  they  then 
'  reviled  the  whole  Sjmod.  And  placing  these 
acts  of  theirs  on  the  public  bulletin  boards, 
they  exposed  them  to  be  read  by  such  as 
chose  to  do  so,  having  posted  them  on  the 
outside  of  the  theatres,  that  they  might 
make  a  spectacle  of  their  impiety.  But  not 
even  was  this  the  limit  of  their  audacity ; 
but  as  if  they  had  done  something  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  canons,  they  dared  to 
bring  what  they  had  done  to  the  ears  of  the 
most  pious  and  Christ-loving  Emperors. 

Things  being  in  this  condition,  the  most 
holy  and  reverend  Cyril,  bishop  of  Alexan- 
dria and  the  most  reverend  Memnon  bishop 
of  the  city  of  Ephesus,  offered  some  books 
composed  by  themselves  and  accusing  the 
most  reverend  Bishop  John  and  those  who 
with  him  had  done  this  thing,  and  conjur- 
ing our  holy  Synod  that  John  and  those 
with  him  should  be  summoned  according 
to  the  canons,  so  that  they  might  apologize 
for  their  daring  acts,  and  if  they  had  any 
complaints  to  make  they  might  speak  and 
prove  them,  for  in  their  written  deposition, 
or  rather  sheet  of  abuse,  they  made  this 
statement  as  a  pretext,  "They  are  Apolli- 
narians,  and  Allans,  and  Eunomians,  and 
therefore  they  have  been  deposed  by  us." 


EPHESUS.     A.D.  431 


239 


When,  therefore,  those  who  had  endured 
their  reviling  were  present,  we  again  neces- 
sarily assembled  in  the  great  church,  being- 
more  than  two  hundred  bishops,  and  by  a 
first,  second,  and  third  call  on  two  days,  we 
summoned  John  and  his  companions  to  the 
Synod,  in  order  that  they  might  examine 
those  who  had  been  reviled,  and  might 
make  explanations,  and  tell  the  causes 
which  led  them  to  draw  up  the  sentence 
of  deposition;  but  he1  did  not  dare  to 
come. 

But  it  was  right  that  he,  if  he  could  truly 
prove  the  before-mentioned  holy  men  to  be 
heretics,  both  should  come  and  prove  the 
truth  of  that  which,  accepted  as  a  true  and 
indubitable  crime,  induced  the  temerarious 
sentence  against  them.  But  being  con- 
demned by  his  own  conscience  he  did  not 
come.  Now  what  he  had  planned  Avas  this. 
For  he  thought  that  when  that  foundation- 
less  and  most  unjust  reviling  was  done 
away,  the  just  vote  of  the  Synod  which  it 
cast  against  the  heretic  Nestoriiis  would 
likewise  be  dissolved.  Being  justly  vexed, 
therefore,  we  determined  to  inflict  accord- 
ing to  law  the  same  penalty  upon  him  and 
those  who  were  with  him,  which  he  contrary 
to  law  had  pronounced  against  those  who 
had  been  convicted  of  no  fault.  But  al- 
though most  justly  and  in  accordance  with 
law  he  would  have  suffered  this  punishment 
yet  in  the  hope  that  by  our  patience  his 
temerity  might  be  conquered,  we  have  re- 
served this  to  the  decision  of  your  holiness. 
In  the  meanwhile,  we  have  deprived  them 
of  communion  and  have  taken  from  them 
all  priestly  power,  so  that  they  may  not  be 
able  to  do  any  harm  by  their  opinions. 
For  those  who  thus  ferociously,  and  cruelly, 
and  uncanonically  are  wont  to  rush  to  such 
frightful  and  most  wicked  things,  how  was 
it  not  necessary  that  they  should  be  stripped 
of  the  powers  which  [as  a  matter  of  fact] 
they  did  not  possess,2  of  being  able  to  do 
harm. 

"With  our  brethren  and  fellow-ministers, 
both  Cyril  the  bishop  and  Memnon,  who 
had  endured  reproval  at  their  hands,  we  are 
all  in  communion,  and  after  the  rashness  [of 
their  accusers]  we  both  have  and  do  per- 


form the  liturgy  in  common,  all  together 
celebrating  the  Synaxis,  having  made  of 
none  effect  their  play  in  writing,  and  hav- 
ing thus  shewn  that  it  lacked  all  validity 
j  and  effect.  For  it  was  mere  reviling  and 
|  nothing  else.  For  what  kind  of  a  synod 
!  could  thirty  men  hold,  some  of  whom  were 
marked  with  the  stamp  of  heresy,  and  some 
without  sees  and  ejected  [from  their  dioce- 
1  ses]  ?  Or  what  strength  could  it  have  in 
opposition  to  a  synod  gathered  from  all  the 
whole  world  ?  For  there  were  sitting  with 
us  the  most  reverend  bishops  Arcadius  and 
Projectus,  and  with  them  the  most  holy 
presbyter  Philip,  all  of  whom  were  sent  by 
your  holiness,  who  gave  to  us  your  presence 
and  filled  the  place  of  the  Apostolic  See 
(tt)s  a7roGTo\ifcr)<;  KcfeeSpas).  Let  then  your 
holiness  be  angered  at  what  took  place. 
But  if  license  were  granted  to  such  as 
wished  to  pour  reproval  upon  the  greater 
sees,  and  thus  unlawfully  and  uncanonically 
to  give  sentence  or  rather  to  utter  revilings 
against  those  over  whom  they  have  no 
power,  against  those  who  for  religion  have 
endured  such  great  conflicts,  by  reason  of 
which  now  also  piety  shines  forth  through 
the  prayers  of  your  holiness  [if,  I  say,  all 
this  should  be  tolerated],  the  affairs  of  the 
Church  would  fall  into  the  greatest  confu- 
sion. But  when  those  who  dare  to  do  such 
things  shall  have  been  chastised  aright,  all 
disturbance  will  cease,  and  the  reverence 
due  to  the  canons  will  be  observed  by  all. 

When  there  had  been  read  in  the  holy 
Synod  what  had  been  done  touching  the  de- 
position of  the  most  irreligious  Pelagians 
and  Coelestines,  of  Ccelestius,  and  Pelagius, 
and  Julian,  and  Prsesidius,  and  Florus,  and 
Marcellian,  and  Orontius,  and  those  inclined 
to  like  errors,  we  also  deemed  it  right 
{i8i/caidi)crafi€v)  that  the  determinations  of 
your  holiness  concerning  them  should  stand 
strong  and  firm.  And  we  all  were  of  the 
same  mind,  holding  them  deposed.  And 
that  you  may  know  in  full  all  things  that 
have  been  done,  we  have  sent  you  a  copy 
of  the  Acts,  and  of  the  subscriptions  of  the 
Synod.  We  pray  that  you,  dearly  beloved 
and  most  longed  for,  may  be  strong  and 
1  mindful  of  us  in  the  Lord.3 


1  Plural  in  the  Greek  but  singular  in  the  Latin,  which  the  critical  I 
editors  consider  the  correct  reading. 


2  It  seems  that  ex0VTa^^  and  not  exovTas,  is  the  true  reading. 

3  The  Latin  adds, '  'Then  all  the  bishops  subscribed  their  names. " 


240 


EPHESUS.    A.D.  431 


THE    DEFINITION    OF  THE    HOLY    AND    ECUMENICAL    SYNOD    OF 

EPHESUS  AGAINST  THE  IMPIOUS  MESSALIANS  WHO  ARE  ALSO 

CALLED  EUCHET^S  AND  ENTHUSIASTS. 

{Found  in  Latin  only.  Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  III.,  col.  809.) 


When  the  most  pious  and  religious  bish- 
ops, Valerian  and  Amphilochius  had  come 
to  us,  they  proposed  that  we  should  con- 
sider in  common  the  case  of  the  Messalians, 
that  is  the  Euchetes  or  Enthusiasts,  who 
were  flourishing  in  Pamphylia,  or  by  what 
other  name  this  most  contaminating  heresy 
is  called.  And  when  we  were  considering 
the  question,  the  most  pious  and  religious 
bishop  Valerian,  presented  to  us  a  synod- 
ical  schedule  which  had  been  drawn  up 
concerning  them  in  the  great  city  of  Con- 
stantinople, under  Sisinnius  of  blessed 
memory:  What  we  read  therein  was  ap- 
proved by  all,  as  well  composed  and  as 
a  due  presentation  of  the  case.  And  it 
seemed  good  to  us  all,  and  to  the  most 
pious  bishops  Valerian  and  Amphilochius 
and  to  all  the  most  pious  bishops  of  the 
provinces  of  Pamphylia  and  Lycaonia,  that 
all  things  contained  in  that  Synodical  chart 
should  be  confirmed  and  in  no  way  re- 
scinded ;  also  that  the  action  taken  at  Alex- 
andria might  also  be  made  firm,  so  that  all 
those  who  throughout  the  whole  province 
are  of  the  Messalian  or  Enthusiastic  heresy, 
or  suspected  of  being  tainted  with  that  her- 
esy, whether  clerics  or  laymen,  may  come 
together  ;  and  if  they  shall  anathematize  in 
writing,  according  to  the  decrees  pronounced 
in  the  aforesaid  synod  [their  errors],  if  tbey 
are  clergymen  they  may  remain  such ;  and 
if  laymen  they  may  be  admitted  to  commun- 
ion. But  if  they  refuse  to  anathematize, 
if  they  were  presbyters  or  deacons  or  in 
any  other  ecclesiastical  grade,  let  them  be 
cast  out  of  the  clergy  and  from  their  grade, 
and  also  from  communion  ;  if  they  be  lay- 
men let  them  be  anathematized. 


Furthermore  those  convicted  of  this  her- 
esy are  no  more  to  be  permitted  to  have  the 
rule  of  our  monasteries,  lest  tares  be  sown 
and  increase.  And  we  give  command  that 
the  most  pious  bishops  Valerian  and  Am- 
philochius, and  the  rest  of  the  most  rev- 
erend bishops  of  the  whole  province  shall 
pay  attention  that  this  decree  be  carried 
into  effect.  In  addition  to  this  it  seemed 
good  that  the  filthy  book  of  this  heresy, 
which  is  called  the  "  Asceticon,"  should  be 
anathematized,  as  composed  by  heretics,  a 
copy  of  which  the  most  religious  and  pi- 
ous Valerian  brought  with  him.  Likewise 
anything  savouring  of  their  impiety  which 
may  be  found  among  the  people,  let  it  be 
anathema. 

Moreover  when  they  come  together,  let 
there  be  commended  by  them  in  writing 
such  things  as  are  useful  and  necessary 
for  concord,  and  communion,  and  arrange- 
ment (dispositionem  vel  dispensationem).  But 
should  any  question  arise  in  connexion  with 
the  present  business,  and  if  it  should  prove 
to  be  difficult  and  ambiguous,  what  is  not 
approved  by  the  most  pious  bishops  Va- 
lerian and  Amphilochius,  and  the  other 
bishops  throughout  the  province,  they 
ought  to  discuss  all  things  by  reference  to 
what  is  written.  And  if  the  most  pious 
bishops  of  the  Lycians  or  of  the  Lycaoni- 
ans  shall  have  been  passed  over  ;  neverthe- 
less let  not  a  Metropolitan  be  left  out  of 
whatever  province  he  may  be.  And  let 
these  things  be  inserted  in  the  Acts  so 
that  if  any  have  need  of  them  they  would 
find  how  also  to  expound  these  things  more 
diligently  to  others. 


NOTE  ON  THE  MESSALIANS  OR  MASSALIANS. 

(Tillemont,  Memoires,  Tom.  VIH.,  Seconde  Partie.    Condensed.) 

St.  Epipkanius  distinguishes  two  sorts  of  persons  who  were  called  by  the  name  of  Messa- 
lians, the  one  and  the  more  ancient  were  heathen,  the  other  were  Christian  in  name. 

The  Messalians  who  bore  the  Christian  name  had  no  beginning,  nor  end,  nor  chief,  nor 
fixed  faith.    Their  first  writers  were  Dadoes,  Sabas,  Adelphus,  Hermes,  Simeon  and  some 


EPIIESUS.     A.D.  431  241 


others.  Adelphus  was  neither  monk  nor  clerk,  but  a  layman.  Sabas  had  taken  the  habit 
of  an  anchorite  and  was  surnamed  "the  Eunuch,"  because  he  had  mutilated  himself. 
Adelphus  was  of  Mesopotamia  and  was  considered  their  leader,  so  that  they  are  sometimes 
called  "Adelphians."  They  are  also  called  "Eustathians."  "Euchites"  is  the  Greek  equiva- 
lent of  "  Messalians  "  in  Hebrew.  They  were  also  called  "Enthusiasts"  or  "Corentes" 
because  of  the  agitation  the  devils  caused  them,  which  they  attributed  to  the  Holy  Spirit. 

St.  Epiphanius  thought  that  these  heretics  sprang  up  in  the  time  of  Constance, 
although  Theodoret  does  not  put  them  down  until  the  days  of  Valentinian.  They  came 
from  Mesopotamia,  but  spread  as  far  as  Antioch  by  the  year  376. 

They  pretended  to  renounce  the  world,  and  to  give  up  their  possessions,  and  under  the 
habit  of  monks  they  taught  Manichaean  impieties,  and  others  still  more  detestable. 

Their  principal  tenet  was  that  everyone  inherited  from  his  ancestors  a  demon,  who 
had  possession  of  his  soul  from  the  moment  of  his  birth,  and  always  led  it  to  evil.  That 
baptism  cut  away  the  outside  branches  of  sin,  but  could  not  free  the  soul  of  this  demon, 
and  that  therefore  its  reception  was  useless.  That  only  constant  prayer  could  drive  out 
this  demon.  That  when  it  was  expelled,  the  Holy  Spirit  descended  and  gave  visible  and 
sensible  marks  of  his  presence,  and  delivered  the  body  from  all  the  uprisings  of  passion, 
and  the  soul  from  the  inclination  to  evil,  so  that  afterwards  there  was  no  need  of  fasting, 
nor  of  controlling  lust  by  the  precepts  of  the  Gospel. 

Besides  this  chief  dogma,  gross  errors,  contrary  to  the  first  principles  of  religion,  were 
attributed  to  them.  That  the  divinity  changed  itself  in  different  manners  to  unite  itself  to 
their  souls.  They  held  that  the  body  of  Christ  was  infinite  like  his  divine  nature  ;  they  did 
not  hesitate  to  say  that  his  body  was  at  first  full  of  devils  which  were  driven  out  when  the 
Word  took  it  upon  him.1  They  claimed  that  they  possessed  clear  knowledge  of  the  state  of 
souls  after  death,  read  the  hearts  and  desires  of  man,  the  secrets  of  the  future  and  saw  the 
Holy  Trinity  with  their  bodily  eyes.  They  affirmed  that  man  could  not  only  attain  per- 
fection but  equal  the  deity  in  virtue  and  knowledge. 

They  never  fasted,  slept  men  and  women  together,  in  warm  weather  in  the  open  streets. 
But  certain  say  that  before  attaining  to  this  liberty  of  license  three  years  of  mortification 
were  required. 

The  most  well-known  point  of  their  discipline  is  that  they  forbade  all  manual  labour  as 
evil,  and  unworthy  of  the  spiritual. 

Harmenopulus  in  his  Basilicce  (Tom.  I.,  Lib.  ix.)  says  that  they  held  the  Cross  in  horror1, 
that  they  refused  to  honour  the  Holy  Virgin,  or  St.  John  the  Baptist,  or  any  of  the  Saints 
unless  they  were  Martyrs  ;  that  they  mutilated  themselves  at  will,  that  they  dissolved  mar- 
riages, that  they  foreswore  and  perjured  themselves  without  scruple,  thai  women  were 
appointed  as  mistresses  of  the  sect  to  instruct  and  govern  men,  even  priests. 

Although  so  opposed  to  the  faith  of  the  Church,  yet  for  all  this  the  Messalians  did  not 
separate  themselves  from  her  communion.  They  did  not  believe  in  the  Communion  as  a 
mystery  which  sanctifies  us,  which  must  be  approached  with  fear  and  faith,  but  only  came 
to  the  holy  Table  to  hide  themselves  and  to  pass  for  Catholics,  for  this  was  one  of  their  arti- 
fices. When  asked,  they  had  no  hesitation  in  denying  all  that  they  believed,  and  were  willing 
to  anathematize  those  who  thought  with  them.  And  all  this  they  did  without  fear,  because 
they  were  taught  they  had  attained  perfection,  that  is  impassibility. 

Vide  Theodoret,  II.  E.,  Lib.  iv.,  cap.  xi. 

Photius  tells  us  that  John  of  Antioch  wrote  against  these  heretics. 

St.  Maximus  the  Abbot  speaks  of  this  heresy  as  still  existing  in  the  Vllth  Century, 
and  as  practising  the  most  abominable  infamies.     Photius  bears  witness  of  its  resuscitation 

1  They  were  therefore  Nestoriaus. 
VOL.    XIV.  R 


242 


EPHESUS.     A.D.  431 


in  his  days  in  Cappadocia  with  its  wonted  corruptions.  Harmenopulus  remarks  that  a 
certain  Eleutherius  of  Paphlagonia  had  added  to  it  new  crimes,  and  that  in  part  it  became 
the  source  of  the  sect  of  the  Bogomiles,  so  well  known  in  the  decadence  of  the  Greek 
empire. 

DECREE  OF  THE  SYNOD  IN  THE  MATTER  OF  EUPREPIUS  AND 

CYRIL. 


{Found  in  Latin  only.     Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  III.,  col.  810.) 

The  petition  of  the  most  pious  bishops  J  ancient  custom  they  shall  be  governed  by 
Euprepius  and  Cyril,  which  is  set  forth  in  ,  the  bishops  by  whom  they  have  been  form- 
tbe  papers  they  offered,  is  honest.  There- 
fore from  the  holy  canons  and  the  external 
laws,  which  have  from  ancient  custom  the 
force  of  law,1  let  no  innovation  be  made  in 
the  cities  of  Europa.  but  according  to  the 


erly  governed.  For  since  there  never  was 
a  metropolitan  who  had  power  otherwise, 
so  neither  hereafter  shall  there  be  any  de- 
parture from  the  ancient  custom. 


NOTE. 


Hefele. 

(Hist,  of  the  Councils,  Vol.  III.,  p.  77.) 

Two  Thracian  bishops,  Euprepius  of  Biza 
(Bizya)  and  Cyril  of  Coele,  gave  occasion  for  a 


decree,  praying  for  protection  against  their 
Metropolitan,  Fritilas  of  Heraclea,  who  had 
gone  over  to  the  party  of  John  of  Antioch, 
and  at  the  same  time  for  the  confirmation  of 
the  previous  practice  of  holding  two  bishoprics 
at  the  same  time.     The  Synod  granted  both. 


1  The  text,  as  the  side  note  remarks,  "  seems  to  be  mutilated  and  depraved  "  in  this  passage,  but  the  meaning  is  clear  enough  as 
given  by  Hefele  in  the  note. 


THE  FOURTH  ECUMENICAL  COUNCIL 
THE  COUNCIL  OF  CHALCEDON. 

A.D.  451. 

Emperors. — Maecian  and  Pulcheria  (in  the  East). 
Valentinian  III.  (in  the  West). 
Pope Leo  I. 


General  Introduction. 

Extracts  from  the  Acts,  Session  I. 

Session  II. 

The  Letter  of  Cyril  to  John  of  Antioch. 

Extracts  from  the  Ads,  Session  II.,  con- 
tinued. 

The  Tome  of  St.  Leo. 

Extracts  from  the  Acts,  Session  II,  con- 
tinued. 

Session  III. 

The  Sentence  of  Condemnation  of  Diosco- 
rus. 

Session  IV. 

Session  V. 


Elenchus. 

The  Definition  of  Faith  of  the  Council, 
with  Notes. 

Session  VI. 

Decree  on  the  Jurisdiction  of  Jerusalem 
and  Antioch,  with  Notes.     Session  VII. 

Decree  loith  regard,  to  Bp.  of  Ephesus. 
Session  XII. 

Decree  with  regard  to  Nicomedia.  Ses- 
sion XIII. 

The  Canons  xoitli  the  Ancient  Epitome  and 
Notes. 

Excursus  to  Canon  XXVIII,  on  its  later 
history. 

Extracts  from  the  Acts,  Session  XVI 


U  2 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION. 

I  should  consider  it  a  piece  of  impertinence  were  I  to  attempt  to  add  anything  to  what 
has  been  already  said  with  regard  to  the  Council  of  Chalcedon.  The  literature  upon  the 
subject  is  so  great  and  so  bitterly  polemical  that  I  think  I  shall  do  well  in  laying  before  my 
readers  the  Acts,  practically  complete  on  all  disputed  points,  and  to  leave  them  to  draw 
their  own  conclusions.  I  shall  not,  however,  be  liable  to  the  charge  of  unfairness  if  I  quote 
at  some  length  the  deductions  of  the  Eagle  of  Meaux,  the  famous  Bossuet,  from  these  acts ; 
and  since  his  somewhat  isolated  position  as  a  Gallican  gives  him  a  singular  fitness  to  serve 
in  this  and  similar  questions  as  a  mediator  between  Catholics  and  Protestants,  his  remarks 
upon  this  Council  will,  I  think,  be  read  with  great  interest  and  respect. 

(Bossuet.     Defensio  Dec.  Gleri  Gallic.  Lib.  VII.,  cap.  xvij.     [Translation  by  Allies].) 

An  important  point  treated  in  the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  that  is,  the  establishing  of  the 
faith,  and  the  approval  of  Leo"s  letter,  is  as  follows  :  Already  almost  the  whole  West,  and 
most  of  the  Easterns,  with  Anatolius  himself,  Bishop  of  Constantinople,  had  gone  so  far  as 
to  confirm  by  subscription  that  letter,  before  the  council  took  place  ;  and  in  the  council 
itself  the  Fathers  had  often  cried  out,  "  We  believe,  as  Leo  :  Peter  hath  spoken  by  Leo  :  we 
have  all  subscribed  the  letter  :  what  has  been  set  forth  is  sufficient  for  the  Faith :  no  other 
exposition  may  be  made."  Things  went  so  far,  that  they  would  hardly  permit  a  definition 
to  be  made  by  the  council.  But  neither  subscriptions  privately  made  before  the  council, 
nor  these  vehement  cries  of  the  Fathers  in  the  council,  were  thought  sufficient  to  tranquil- 
lize minds  in  so  unsettled  a  state  of  the  Church,  for  fear  that  a  matter  so  important  might 
seem  determined  rather  by  outcries  than  by  fair  and  legitimate  discussion.  And  the  clergy 
of  Constantinople  exclaimed,  "It  is  a  few  who  cry  out,  not  the  whole  council  which  speaks." 
So  it  was  determined,  that  the  letter  of  Leo  should  be  lawfully  examined  by  the  council,  and 
a  definition  of  faith  be  written  by  the  synod  itself.  So  the  acts  of  foregoing  councils  being 
previously  read,  the  magistrates  proposed  concerning  Leo's  letter,  "  As  we  see  the  divine 
Gospels  laid  before  your  Piety,  let  each  one  of  the  assembled  bishops  declare,  whether  the 
exposition  of  the  318  Fathers  at  Nice,  and  of  the  150  who  afterwards  assembled  in  the  im- 
perial city,  agrees  with  the  letter  of  the  most  reverend  Archbishop  Leo." 

After  the  question  as  to  examining  the  letter  of  Leo  was  put  in  this  form,  it  will  be  worth 
while  to  weigh  the  sentences  and,  as  they  are  called,  the  votes  of  the  Fathers,  in  order  to 
understand  from  the  beginning  why  they  approved  of  the  letter  ;  why  they  afterwards  de- 
fended it  with  so  much  zeal  ;  why,  finally,  it  was  ratified  after  so  exact  an  examination  of 
the  council.  Anatolius  first  gives  his  sentence.  "The  letter  of  the  most  holy  and  religious 
Archbishop  Leo  agrees  with  the  creed  of  our  318  Fathers  at  Nice,  and  of  the  150  who  after- 
wards assembled  at  Constantinople,  and  confirmed  the  same  faith,  and  with  the  proceedings 
at  Ephesus  under  the  most  blessed  Cyril,  who  is  among  the  saints,  by  the  Ecumenical  and 
holy  Council,  when  it  condemned  Nestorius.  I  therefore  agree  to  it,  and  willingly  subscribe 
to  it."  These  are  the  words  of  one  plainly  deliberating,  not  blindly  subscribing  out  of  obe- 
dience. The  rest  say  to  the  same  effect :  "  It  agrees,  and  I  subscribe."  Many  plainly  and 
expressly,  "  It  agrees,  and  I  therefore  subscribe."  Some  add,  "  It  agrees,  and  I  subscribe, 
as  it  is  correct."  Others,  "I  am  sure  that  it  agrees."  Others,  "As  it  is  concordant,  and 
has  the  same  aim,  we  embrace  it,  and  subscribe."  Others,  "This  is  the  faith  we  have  long 
held  :  this  we  hold  :  in  this  we  were  baptized  :  in  this  we  baptize."  Others,  and  a  great  part, 
"  As  I  see,  as  I  feel,  as  I  have  proved,  as  I  find  that  it  agrees,  I  subscribe."  Others,  "As  I 
am  persuaded,  instructed,  informed,  that  all  agrees,  I  subscribe."     Many  set  forth  their  dif- 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451  245 


ficulties,  mostly  arising  from  a  foreign  language  ;  others  from  the  subject  matter,  saying, 
that  they  had  heard  the  letter,  "  and  in  very  many  points  were  assured  it  was  right  ;  some 
few  words  stood  in  their  way,  which  seemed  to  point  at  a  certain  division  in  the  person  of 
Christ."  They  add,  that  they  had  been  informed  by  Paschasinus  and  the  Legates  "  that 
there  is  no  division,  but  one  Christ ;  therefore," they  say,  "we  agree  and  subscribe."  Others 
after  mentioning  what  Paschasinus  and  Lucentius  had  said,  thus  conclude:  "By  this  we 
have  been  satisfied  and,  considering  that  it  agrees  in  all  things  with  the  holy  Fathers,  we 
agree  and  subscribe."  "Where  the  Illyrian  bishops,  and  others  who  before  that  examination 
had  expressed  their  acclamations  to  the  letter,  again  cry  out,  "  We  all  say  the  same  thing, 
and  agree  with  this."  So  that,  indeed,  it  is  evident  that,  in  the  council  itself,  and  before  it 
their  agreement  is  based  on  this  that,  after  weighing  the  matter,  they  considered,  they 
judged,  they  were  persuaded,  that  all  agreed  with  the  Fathers,  and  perceived  that  the  com- 
mon faith  of  all  and  each  had  been  set  forth  by  Leo.  This  is  that  examination  of  Leo's  let- 
ter, synodically  made  at  Chalcedon,  and  placed  among  the  acts. 

(Gallia  Orthod.,  LIX.) 

Nor  did  Anatolius  and  the  other  bishops  receive  it,  until  they  had  deliberated,  and  found 
that  Leo's  letter  agreed  with  the  preceding  councils. 

(Gallia  Orthod, ,  LX.) 

But  here  a  singular  discussion  arises  between  the  eminent  Cardinals  Bellarmine  and 
Baronius.  The  latter,  and  with  him  a  large  number  of  our  theologians,  recognize  the  letter 
of  Leo  as  the  Type  and  Ride  of  faith,  by  which  all  Churches  were  bound :  but  Bellarmine, 
alarmed  at  the  examination  which  he  could  not  deny,  answers  thus  :  "Leo  had  sent  his  let- 
ter to  the  council,  not  as  containing  his  final  and  definitive  sentence,  but  as  an  instruction, 
assisted  by  which  the  bishops  might  form  a  better  judgment."  But,  most  eminent  man, 
allow  me  to  say  that  Leo,  upon  the  appeal  of  Eutyches,  and  at  the  demand  of  Flavian,  com- 
posed this  letter  for  a  summary  of  the  faith,  and  sent  it  to  every  Church  in  all  parts,  when 
as  yet  no  one  thought  about  a  council.  Therefore  it  was  not  an  instruction  to  the  council 
which  he  provided,  but  an  Apostolic  sentence  which  he  put  forth.  The  fact  is  that  out  of 
this  strait  there  was  no  other  escape  :  Baronius  will  not  allow  that  a  letter,  confirmed  by  so 
great  an  authority  of  the  Apostolic  See,  should  be  attributed  to  any  other  power  but  that 
which  is  supreme  and  indefectible  :  Bellarmine  will  not  take  that  to  emanate  from  the 
supreme  and  indefectible  authority,  which  was  subjected  to  synodical  inquiry,  and  delibera- 
tion. What,  then,  is  the  issue  of  this  conflict,  unless  that  it  is  equally  evident  that  the  let- 
ter was  written  with  the  whole  authority  of  the  Apostolic  See,  and  yet  subjected,  as  usual,  to 
the  examination  of  an  Universal  Council. 

(lb.  LXI.) 
And  in  this  we  follow  no  other  authority  than  Leo  himself,  who  speaks  thus  in  his  letter 
to  Theodoret :  "What  God  had  before  decreed  by  our  ministry,  he  confirmed  by  the  irre- 
versible assent  of  the  whole  brotherhood,  to  shew  that  what  was  first  put  forth  in  form  by 
the  First  See  of  all,  and  then  received  by  the  judgment  of  the  whole  Christian  world,  really 
proceeded  from  himself."  Here  is  a  decree,  as  Baronius  says,  but  not  as  Bellarmine  says, 
an  instruction  :  here  is  a  judgment  of  the  whole  world  upon  a  decree  of  the  Apostolic  See. 
He  proceeds  :  "  For  in  order  that  the  consent  of  other  sees  to  that  which  the  Lord  of  all 
appointed  to  preside  over  the  rest  might  not  appear  flattery,  nor  any  other  adverse  suspicion 
creep  in,  persons  were  at  first  found  who  doubted  concerning  our  judgments."  And  not 
only  heretics,  but  even  the  Fathers  of  the  council  themselves,  as  the  acts  bear  witness. 


246  CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


Here  the  First  See  shews  a  fear  of  flattery,  if  doubt  about  its  judgments  were  forbidden. 
Moreover,  "  The  truth  itself  likewise  is  both  more  clearly  conspicuous,  and  more  strongly 
maintained,  when  after  examination  confirms  what  previous  faith  had  taught."  Here  in  plain 
words  he  speaks  of  an  examination  by  the  council,  dcfide,  not  by  himself,  as  they  wretchedly 
object,  but  of  that  faith  which  the  decretal  letter  set  forth.  And  at  length  that  same  letter 
is  issued  as  the  Rule,  but  confirmed  by  the  assent  of  the  universal  holy  Council,  or  as  he 
had  before  said,  after  that  it  is  confirmed  by  the  irreversible  assent  of  the  whole  Brother- 
hood. Out  of  this  expression  of  that  great  Pontiff,  the  Gallican  clergy  drew  theirs,  that  in 
questions  of  faith  the  judgment  is,  what  Tertullian  calls,  "not  to  be  altered;"  what  Leo 
calls,  "  not  to  be  reconsidered,"  only  when  the  assent  of  the  Church  is  added. 

{Drfcns.  Dec.  Cleri   Gall.  VII.  xvij.) 

This  certainly  no  one  can  be  blamed  for  holding  with  him  and  with  the  Fathers  of 
Chalcedon.  The  forma  is  set  forth  by  the  Apostolic  See,  yet  it  is  to  be  received  with  a 
judgment,  and  that  free,  and  each  bishop  individually  is  inferior  to  the  First,  yet  so  that  all 
together  pass  judgment  even  on  his  decree. 

They  conceived  no  other  way  of  removing  all  doubt ;  for,  after  the  conclusion  of  the 
synod,  the  Emperor  thus  proclaims:  "Let  then  all  profane  contentions  cease,  for  he  is 
indeed  impious  and  sacrilegious,  who,  after  the  sentence  of  so  many  priests,  leaves  anything 
for  his  own  opinion  to  consider."  He  then  prohibits  all  discussion  concerning  religion  ;  for, 
says  he,  "he  does  an  injury  to  the  judgment  of  the  most  religious  council,  who  endeavours 
to  open  afresh,  and  publicly  discuss,  what  has  been  once  judged,  and  rightly  ordered." 
Here  in  the  condemnation  of  Eutyches  is  the  order  of  Ecclesiastical  judgments  in  questions 
of  faith.  He  is  judged  by  his  proper  Bishop,  Flavian  :  the  cause  is  reheard,  reconsidered 
by  the  Pope  St.  Leo  ;  it  is  decided  by  a  declaration  of  the  Apostolic  See  :  after  that  declara- 
tion follows  the  examination,  inquiry,  judgment  of  the  Fathers  or  bishops,  in  a  General 
Council :  after  the  declaration  has  been  approved  by  the  judgment  of  the  Fathers  no  place 
is  any  longer  left  for  doubt  or  discussion. 


EXTRACTS   FROM  THE  ACTS. 


SESSION  I. 


(Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  IV.,  col.  93.) 

Paschasinus,  the  most  reverend  bishop  1  set  forth  specifically  in  what  he  hath  gone 
and  legate  of  the  Apostolic  See,  stood  up  in  astray 


the  midst  with  his  most  reverend  colleagues 
and  said :  We  received  directions  at  the 
hands  of  the  most  blessed  and  apostolic 
bishop  of  the  Eoman  city,  which  is  the  head 
of  all  the  churches,  which  directions  say 
that  Dioscorus  is  not  to  be  allowed  a  seat 
in  this  assembly,  but  that  if  he  should  at- 
tempt to  take  his  seat  he  is  to  be  cast  out. 
This  instruction  we  must  carry  out ;  if  now 
your  holiness  so  commands  let  him  be  ex- 
pelled or  else  we  leave.1 

The  most  glorious  judges  and  the  full 
senate  said :  What  special  charge  do  you 
prefer  against  the  most  reverend  bishop 
Dioscorus  ? 

Paschasinus,  the  most  reverend  bishop 
and  legate  of  the  Apostolic  See,  said  :  Since 
he  has  come,  it  is  necessary  that  objection 
be  made  to  him. 

The  most  glorious  judges  and  the  whole 
senate  said :  In  accordance  with  what  has 
been  said,  let  the  charge  under  which  he 
lies,  be  specifically  made. 

Lucentius,  the  most  reverend  bishop  hav- 
ing the  place  of  the  Apostolic  See,  said  : 
Let  him  give  a  reason  for  his  judgment. 
For  he  undertook  to  give  sentence  against 
one  over  whom  he  had  no  jurisdiction.  And 
he  dared  to  hold  a  synod  without  the 
authority  of  the  Apostolic  See,  a  thing 
which  had  never  taken  place  nor  can  take 
place.2 

Paschasinus  the  most  reverend  bishop, 
holding  the  place  of  the  Apostolic  See,  said : 
We  cannot  go  counter  to  the  decrees  of  the 
most  blessed  and  apostolic  bishop  ["Pope" 
for  "bishop"  in  the  Latin],  who  governs 
the  Apostolic  See,  nor  against  the  ecclesias- 
tical canons  nor  the  patristic  traditions. 


The  most 
senate,  said : 


glorious  judges  and  the  full 
It  is  proper  that  you  should 


Lucentius,  the  venerable  bishop  and  hold- 
ing the  place  of  the  Apostolic  See,  said : 
We  will  not  suffer  so  great  a  wrong  to  be 
done  us  and  you,  as  that  he  who  is  come  to 
be  judged  should  sit  down  [as  one  to  give 
judgment] . 

The  glorious  judges  and  the  whole  senate 
said :  If  you  hold  the  office  of  judge,  you 
ought  not  to  defend  yourself  as  if  you  were 
to  be  judged. 

And  when  Dioscorus  the  most  religious 
bishop  of  Alexandria  at  the  bidding  of  the 
most  glorious  judges  and  of  the  sacred  as- 
sembly (t?}?  lepas  crvyKXtjTov 3)  had  sat  down 
in  the  midst,  and  the  most  reverend  Roman 
bishops  also  had  sat  down  in  their  proper 
places,  and  kept  silence,  Eusebius,  the  most 
reverend  bishop  of  the  city  of  Dorylseum, 
stepping  into  the  midst,  said : 

[He  then  presented  a  'petition,  and  the  Acts 
of  the  Latrocinium  were  read.  Also  the  Acts 
of  the  council  of  Constantinople  tinder  Fla- 
vian against  Eutyches  (col.  175).] 

And  when  they  were  read,  the  most 
glorious  judges  and  immense  assembly 
(v7T€p(pvT}<i  cnjy/ckrjTos)  said :  What  do  the 
most  reverend  bishops  of  the  present  holy 
synod  say?  When  he  thus  expounded, 
the  faith  did  Flavian,  of  holy  memory, 
preserve  the  orthodox  and  catholic  relig- 
ion, or  did  he  in  any  respect  err  con- 
cerning it  ? 

Paschasinus  the  most  reverend  bishop, 
representing  the  Apostolic  See,  said ; 
Flavian  of  blessed  memory  hath  most  holily 
and  perfectly  expounded  the  faith.  His 
faith  and  exposition  agrees  with  the  epistle 
of  the  most  blessed  and  apostolic  man,  the 
bishop  of  Rome. 

Anatolius  the  most  reverend  archbishop 
of  Constantinople  said ;  The  blessed  Fla- 


1  This  whole  paragraph  reads  with  material  differences  in  the 
Latin.  Moreover  while  the  Greek  text  is  clear  and  grammatical, 
the  Latin  is  most  incorrect  and  halting.  Leo  is  described  as 
"  Pope  of  the  city  of  Rome,''  instead  of  "bishop  of  Rome." 

2  This  statement,  so  absolutely  contrary  to  fact,  has  been  a  sore 
difficulty  to  the  commentators.    Arendt  {Leo  ihe  Great  and  his 


mission  of  the  Pope,  taken  the  presidency  there,  and  conducted 
the  proceedings,  for  Leo  himself  had  acknowledged  the  synod  by 
the  fact  that  he  allowed  his  legates  to  be  present  at  it."  Almost 
the  same  is  the  explanation  of  the  Ballerini  (Leo  M.  Opera,  Tom. 
ii.  460,  n.  15.) 
3  The  Latin  here  has  the  usual  form  "  amplissimus  senatus," 


Times,  §  270)  says  that  this  meant  only  that  "  he  had,  without  per-  |  for  which  the  Greek  is  wepi^ai'ta-TOToi  ouytAiTiKol 


248 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


vian  liath  beautifully  and  orthodoxly  set 
forth  the  faith  of  our  fathers. 

Lucentius,  the  most  reYereud  bishop,  and 
legate  of  the  Apostolic  See,  said  ;  Since  the 
faith  of  Flavian  of  blessed  memory  agrees 
with  the  Apostolic  See  and  the  tradition  of 
the  fathers  it  is  just  that  the  sentence  by 
/which  he  was  condemned  by  the  heretics 
should  be  turned  back  upon  them  by  this 
most  holy  synod. 

Maximus  the  most  reverend  bishop  of 
Antioch  in  Syria,  said :  Archbishop  Flavian 
of  blessed  memory  hath  set  forth  the  faith 
orthodoxly  and  in  accordance  with  the  most 
beloved-of-God  and  most  holy  Archbishop 
Leo.     And  this  we  all  receive  with  zeal. 

Thalassius,  the  most  reverend  bishop  of 
Coesarea  in  Cappadocia  said  ;  Flavian  of 
blessed  memory  hath  spoken  in  accordance 
with  Cyril  of  blessed  memory. 

[And  so,  one  after  another,  the  bishops 
expressed  their  opinions.  The  reading  of  the 
acts  of  the  Council  of  Constantinople  loas 
then  continued^ 

And  at  this  point  of  the  reading,  Dios- 
corus,  the  most  reverend  Archbishop  of 
Alexandria  said,  I  receive  "  the  of  two ; " 
"the  two"  I  do  not  receive  (to  e'/c  Bvo 
he-xpfiai  •  to  Svo,  ov  Be-^o/xai).  I  am  forced 
to  be  impudent,  but  the  matter  is  one 
which  touches  my  soul. 

{After  a  few  remarks  the  reading  was  con- 
tinued and  the  rest  of  the  acts  of  the  Latro- 


cinium  of  Rhesus  completed.  The  judges 
then  postponed  to  the  morrow  the  setting  forth 
a  decree  on  the  faith  but  intimated  that  Di- 
oscorus  and  his  associates  should  siiffer  the 
punishment  to  which  they  unjustly  sentenced 
Flavian.  TJtis  met  with  the  approval  of  all 
the  bishops  except  those  of  lllyrica  xoho  said : 
"  We  all  have  erred,  let  us  all  be  pardoned." 
(col.  323.)  ] 

The  most  glorious  judges  and  the  whole 
senate  said ;  Let  each  one  of  the  most 
reverend  bishops  of  the  present  synod, 
hasten  to  set  forth  how  he  believes,  Writing 
without  any  fear,  but  placing  the  fear  of 
God  before  his  eyes;  knowing  that  our 
most  divine  and  pious  lord  believes  accord- 
ing to  the  ecthesis  of  the  three  hundred 
and  eighteen  holy  fathers  at  Nice,  and 
according  to  the  ecthesis  of  the  one  hun- 
dred and  fifty  after  them,  and  according  to 
the  Canonical  epistles  and  ectheses  of  the 
holy  fathers  Gregory,  Basil,  Athanasius, 
Hilary,  Ambrose,  and  according  to  the  two 
canonical  epistles  of  Cyril,  which  were  con- 
firmed and  published  in  the  first  Council  of 
Ephesus,  nor  does  he  in  any  point  depart 
from  the  faith  of  the  same.  For  the  most 
reverend  archbishop  of  Old  Rome,  Leo, 
appears  to  have  sent  a  letter  to  Flavian  of 
1  blessed  memory,  with  reference  to  Euty- 
j  ches's  unbelieviug  doubt  which  was  spring- 
I  ing  up  against  the  Catholic  Church. 
End  of  the  first  Actio. 


EXTRACTS  FKOM  THE  ACTS. 

SESSION  II. 


(L.  and  C,  Concilia,  Tom.  IV.,  col.  338.) 


When  all  were  seated  before  the  rails  of  I 
the  most  holy  altar,  the  most  superb  and 
glorious  judges  and  the  great  (vTrep(j>vr)<s) 
senate  said  ;  At  a  former  meeting  the  ques- 
tion was  examined  of  the  condemnation  of 
the  most  reverend  bishop  Flavian  of  blessed 
memory  and  Eusebius,  and  it  was  patent 
to  you  all  with  what  justice  and  accuracy 
the  examination  was  conducted :  and  it  was 
proved  that  they  had  been  cruelly  and  im- 
properly condemned.  What  course  we 
should  pursue  in  this  matter  became  clear 
after  your  deliberations.  Now  however  the 
question  to  be  enquired  into,  studied,  and 


decided,  is  how  the  true  faith  is  to  be  es- 
tablished, which  is  the  chief  end  for  which 
this  Council  has  been  assembled.  As  we 
know  that  ye  are  to  render  to  God  a  strict 
account  not  only  for  your  own  souls  in  par- 
ticular, but  as  well  for  the  souls  of  all  of  us 
who  desire  rightly  to  be  taught  all  things 
that  pertain  to  religion,  and  that  all  am- 
biguity be  taken  away,  by  the  agreement 
and  consent  of  all  the  holy  fathers,  and  by 
their  united  exposition  and  doctrine  ;  has- 
ten therefore  without  any  fear  of  pleasing 
or  displeasing,  to  set  forth  (e/cSiaSai)  the 
pure  faith,  so  that  they  who  do  not  seem  to 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


249 


believe  with  all  the  rest,  may  be  brought 
to  unity  through  the  acknowledging  of  the 
truth.  For  we  wish  you  to  know  that  the 
most  divine  and  pious  lord  of  the  whole 
world  and  ourselves  hold  the  orthodox 
faith  set  forth  by  the  318  and  by  the  150 
holy  fathers,  and  what  also  has  been  taught 
by  the  rest  of  the  most  holy  and  glorious 
fathers,  and  in  accordance  with  this  is  our 
belief. 

The  most  reverend  bishops  cried;  Any 
other  setting  forth  (e/c&ecrw  aXkr/v)  no  one 
makes,  neither  will  we  attempt  it,  neither 
will  we  .dare  to  set  forth  [anything  new] 
(iic&e<r$ai).  For  the  fathers  taught,  and  in 
their  writings  are  preserved,  what  things 
were  set  forth  by  them,  and  further  than 
this  we  can  say  nothing. 

Cecropius,  the  most  reverend  bishop  of 
Sebastopol  said  :  The  matters  concerning 
Eutyches  have  been  examined,  and  the 
most  holy  archbishop  of  Rome  has  given 
a  form  (tvttov)  which  we  follow  and  to  his 
letter  we  all  [i.  e.  those  in  his  neighbour- 
hood] have  subscribed. 

The  most  reverend  bishops  cried  :  These 
are  the  opinions  of  all  of  us.  The  exposi- 
tions (eKTeSevra)  already  made  are  quite 
sufficient :  it  is  not  lawful  to  make  any 
other. 

The  most  glorious  judges  and  great  senate 
said,  If  it  pleases  your  reverence,  let  the 
most  holy  patriarch  of  each  province,  choos- 
ing one  or  two  of  his  own  province  and 
going  into  the  midst,  and  together  consid- 
ering the  faith,  make  known  to  all  what  is 
agreed  iipon.  So  that  if,  as  we  desire,  all 
be  of  one  mind,  all  ambiguity  may  be  re- 
moved: But  if  some  entertain  contrary 
opinions  (which  we  do  not  believe  to  be  the 
case)  we  may  know  what  their  opinions  are. 

The  most  reverend  bishops  cried  out,  we 
make  no  new  exposition  in  writing.  This 
is  the  law,  [i.  e.  of  the  Third  Synod]  which 
teaches  that  what  has  been  set  forth  is 
sufficient.  The  law  wills  that  no  other  ex- 
position should  be  made.  Let  the  sayings 
of  the  Fathers  remain  fast. 

Florentius,  the  most  reverend  bishop  of 
Sardis,  said,  since  it  is  not  possible  for 
those  who  follow  the  teaching  of  the  holy 
Synod  of  Nice,  which  was  confirmed  rightly 
and  piously  at  Ephesus,  to  draw  up  sud- 
denly a  declaration  of  faith  in  accordance 
with  the  faith  of  the  holy  fathers  Cyril  and 
Celestine,  and  of  the  letter  of  the  most  holy 


Leo,  we  therefore  pray  your  magnificence  to 
give  us  time,  so  that  we  may  be  able  to 
arrive  at  the  truth  of  the  matter  with  a  fit- 
ting document,  although  so  far  as  we  are 
concerned,  who  have  subscribed  the  letter 
of  the  most  holy  Leo,  nothing  further  is 
needed. 

Cecropius,  the  most  reverend  bishop  of 
Sebastopol,  said,  The  faith  has  been  well 
defined  by  the  318  holy  fathers  and  con- 
firmed by  the  holy  fathers  Athanasius,  Cyril, 
Celestine,  Hilary,  Basil,  Gregory,  and  now 
once  again  by  the  most  holy  Leo  :  and  we 
pray  that  those  things  which  were  decreed 
by  the  318  holy  fathers,  and  by  the  most 
holy  Leo  be  read. 

The  most  glorious  judges  and  great  Sen- 
ate said  :  Let  there  be  read  the  expositions 
(eKTe&evTa)  of  the  318  fathers  gathered  to- 
gether at  Nice. 

Eunomius,  the  most  reverend  bishop  of 
Nicomedia  read  from  a  book  [the  Exposi- 
tion of  faith  of  the  318  fathers.1] 

The  Exposition  of  faith  of  the  Council  held 
at  Nice. 

"  In  the  consulate  of  Paul  and  Julian  " 
etc. 

"  We  believe  in  one  God,"  etc. 

"  But  those  who  say,"  etc. 

The  most  reverend  bishops  cried  out ; 
This  is  the  orthodox  faith ;  this  we  all 
believe  :  into  this  we  were  baptized ;  into 
this  we  baptize  :  Blessed  Cyril  so  taught : 
this  is  the  true  faith  :  this  is  the  holy  faith  : 
this  is  the  everlasting  faith :  into  this  we 
were  baptized :  into  this  we  baptize  :  Ave 
all  so  believe :  so  believes  Leo,  the  Pope 
(o  TraTrai) :  Cyril  thus  believed  :  Pope  Leo 
so  interpreted  it. 

The  most  glorious  judges  and  great  senate 
said,  Let  there  be  read  what  was  set  forth 
by  the  150  holy  fathers. 

Aetius,  the  reverend  deacon  of  Constanti- 
nople read  from  a  book  [the  creed  of  the 
150  fathers.2] 

The  holy  faith  which  the  150  fathers  set 
forth  as  consonant  to  the  holy  and  great 
Synod  of  Nice. 

"  We  believe  in  one  God,"  etc. 

All  the  most  reverend  bishops  cried  out : 
This  is  the  faith  of  all  of  us  :  we  all  so  be- 
lieve. 

The  reverend  archdeacon  Aetius  said, 
There  remains  the  letter  of  Cyril  of  holy 


1  Added  in  the  Latin  acts. 


a  Ibid. 


250 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


aucl  blessed  memory,  sometime  bishop  of 
the  great  city  Alexandria,  which  he  wrote 
to  Nestorius,  which  was  approved  by  all  the 
most  holy  bishops  assembled  in  the  first 
Council  at  Ephesus,  called  to  condemn  the 
same  Nestorius,  and  which  was  confirmed 
by  the  subscription  of  all.  There  is  also 
another  letter  of  the  same  Cyril,  of  blessed 
memory,  which  he  wrote  to  John,  of  blessed 
memory,  sometime  bishop  of  the  great  city 
of  Antioch,  which  likewise  was  confirmed. 
If  it  be  so  ordered,  I  shall  read  these. 

The  most  glorious  judges  and  great  sen- 
ate said,  Let  the  letters  of  Cyril  of  blessed 
memory  be  read. 


Aetius,  the  Archdeacon  of  the  imperial 
city  Constantinople  read. 

To  the  most  reverend  and  most  religious 
fellow-priest  Nestorius,  Cyril  sends  greeting 
in  the  Lord. 

[KarcKp'X  vapoven  /xrjv  tc.  r.  \.  Led.  Oblo- 
quuntur  quiclem,  etc.  This  letter  is  found 
among  the  acts  of  the  Council  of  Ejjhesus.] 

Likewise  the  same  Archdeacon  Aetius 
read  [the  letter  of  the  same  holy  Cyril  of 
blessed  memory  to  John  of  Antioch,  on  the 
peace] . 

[This  letter  begins,  EvcfrpaiveSeocrav  oi  ovpa- 
vol  k.  t.  X.;  and  in  the  Latin  Lsetentur 
cseli.] 


THE  LETTER  OF  CYEIL  TO  JOHN  OF  ANTIOCH. 


{Found  in  Lahbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  IV.,  col.  343  and  col.  164 ;  and  in  Micjne, 
Pat.  Graec,  Tom.  LXXVIL  [Gyrilli  Opera,  Tom.  X.~],  col.  173.  This  is  the  letter  which 
is  often  styled  "the  Ephesine  Creed") 


Cyril  to  my  lord,  beloved  brother,  and 
fellow  minister  John,  greeting  in  the  Lord. 

"  Let  the  heavens  rejoice,  and  let  the 
earth  be  glad"  for  the  middle  wall  of  parti- 
tion has  been  taken  away,  and  grief  has 
been  silenced,  and  all  kind  of  difference  of 
opinion  has  been  removed ;  Christ  the 
Saviour  of  us  all  having  awarded  peace  to 
his  churches,  through  our  being  called  to 
this  by  our  most  devout  and  beloved  of 
God  kings,  who  are  the  best  imitators  of  the 
piety  of  their  ancestors  in  keeping  the  right 
faith  in  their  souls  firm  and  immovable,  for 
they  chiefly  give  their  mind  to  the  affairs  of 
the  holy  Churches,  in  order  that  they  may 
have  the  noted  glory  forever  and  show  forth 
their  most  renowned  kingdom,  to  whom 
also  Christ  himself  the  Lord  of  powers  dis- 
tributes good  things  with  plenteous  hand, 
and  gives  to  prevail  over  their  enemies  and 
grants  them  victory.  For  he  does  not  lie 
in  saying  :  "  As  I  live  saith  the  Lord,  them 
that  honour  me,  I  will  honour."  For  when 
my  lord,  my  most-beloved-of-God,  fellow- 
minister  and  brother  Paul,  had  arrived  in 
Alexandria,  we  were  filled  with  gladness, 
and  most  naturally  at  the  coming  of  such  a 
man  as  a  mediator,  who  was  ready  to  work 
beyond  measure  that  he  might  overcome 
the  envy  of  the  devil  and  heal  our  divis- 
ions, and  who  by  removing  the  offences 
scattered  between  us,  would  crown  your 
Church  and  ours  with  harmony  and  peace. 

Of  the  reason  of  the  disagreement  it  is 
superfluous  to  speak.  I  deem  it  more 
useful  both  to  think  and  speak  of  things 
suitable  to  the  time  of  peace.  We  were 
therefore  delighted  at  meeting  with  that 
distinguished  and  most  pious  man,  who 
expected  perhaps  to  have  no  small  struggle, 
persuading  us  that  it  is  necessary  to  form 
an  alliance  for  the  peace  of  the  Church,  and 
to  drive  away  the  laughter  of  the  heterodox, 
and  for  this  end  to  blunt  the  goads  of  the 
stubbornness  of  the  devil.  He  found  us 
ready  for  this,  so  as  absolutely  to  need  no 
labour  to  be  bestowed  upon  us.  For  we 
remembered  the  Saviour's    saying;    "My 


peace  I  give  unto  you,  my  peace  I  leave 
with  you."  We  have  been  taught  also  to 
say  in  prayers  :  "  O  Lord  our  God  give  us 
peace,  for  thou  hast  given  us  all  things." 
So  that  if  anyone  should  be  in  the  partici- 
pation of  the  peace  furnished  from  God,  he 
is  not  lacking  in  any  good.  That  as  a  mat- 
ter of  fact,  the  disagreement  of  the  Churches 
happened  altogether  unnecessarily  and  in- 
opportunely, we  now  have  been  fully  satis- 
fied by  the  document  brought  by  my  lord, 
the  most  pious  bishop  Paul,  which  contains 
an  unimpeachable  confession  of  faith,  and 
this  he  asserted  to  have  been  prepared,  by 
your  holiness  and  by  the  God-beloved 
Bishops  there.  The  document  is  as  fol- 
lows, and  is  set  down  verbatim  in  this 
our  epistle. 

Concerning  the  Virgin  Mother  of  God, 
we  thus  think  and  speak ;  and  of  the  man- 
ner of  the  Incarnation  of  the  Only  Begotten 
Son  of  God,  necessarily,  not  by  way  of 
addition  but  for  the  sake  of  certainty,  as  we 
have  received  from  the  beginning  from  the 
divine  Scriptures  and  from  the  tradition 
of  the  holy  fathers,  Ave  will  speak  briefly, 
adding  nothing  whatever  to  the  Faith  set 
forth  by  the  holy  Fathers  in  Nice.  For,  as 
we  said  before,  it  suffices  for  all  knowledge 
of  piety  and  the  refutation  of  all  false 
doctrine  of  heretics.  But  we  speak,  not 
presuming  on  the  impossible  ;  but  with  the 
confession  of  our  own  weakness,  excluding 
those  who  wish  us  to  cling  to  those  things 
which  transcend  human  consideration. 

We  confess,  therefore,  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  the  Only  Begotten  Son  of  God,  per- 
fect God,  and  perfect  Man  of  a  reasonable 
soul  and  flesh  consisting ;  begotten  before 
the  ages  of  the  Father  according  to  his 
Divinity,  and  in  the  last  days,  for  us  and 
for  our  salvation,  of  Mary  the  Virgin  accord- 
ing to  his  humanity,  of  the  same  substance 
with  his  Father  according  to  his  Divinity, 
and  of  the  same  substance  with  us  accord- 
ing to  his  humanity;  for  there  became  a 
union  of  two  natures.  Wherefore  we  con- 
fess one  Christ,  one  Son,  one  Lord. 

According  to  this  understanding  of  this 


^52 


CHALOEDON.     A.D.  451 


unmixed  union,  we  confess  the  holy  Virgin 
to  be  Mother  of  God ;  because  God  the 
"Word  was  incarnate  and  became  Man,  and 
from  this  conception  he  united  the  temple 
taken  from  her  with  himself. 

For  we  know  the  theologians  make  some 
things  of  the  Evangelical  and  Apostolic 
teaching  about  the  Lord  common  as  per- 
taining to  the  one  person,  and  other 
things  they  divide  as  to  the  two  natures, 
and  attribute  the  worthy  ones  to  God  on 
account  of  the  Divinity  of  Christ,  and  the 
lowly  ones  on  account  of  his  humanity  [to 
his  humanity]. 

These  being  your  holy  voices,  and  find- 
ing ourselves  thinking  the  same  with  them 
("One  Lord,  One  Faith,  One  Baptism,") 
we  glorified  God  the  Saviour  of  all,  con- 
gratulating one  another  that  our  churches 
and  yours  have  the  Faith  which  agrees  with 
the  God-inspired  Scriptures  and  the  tradi- 
tions of  our  holy  Fathers. 

Since  I  learned  that  certain  of  those  ac- 
customed to  find  fault  were  humming  around 
like  vicious  wasps,  and  vomiting  out  wretch- 
ed words  against  me,  as  that  I  say  the  holy 
Body  of  Christ  was  brought  from  heaven, 
and  not  of  the  holy  Virgin,  I  thought  it 
necessary  to  say  a  few  words  concerning 
this  to  them : 

O  fools,  and  only  knoAving  how  to  mis- 
represent, how  haAre  ye  been  led  to  such  a 
judgment,  how  have  ye  fallen  into  so  fool- 
ish a  sickness  ?  For  it  is  necessary,  it  is 
undoubtedly  necessary,  to  understand  that 
almost  all  the  opposition  to  us  concerning 
the  faith,  arose  from  our  affirming  that  the 
holy  Virgin  is  Mother  of  God.  But  if  from 
heaven  and  not  from  her  the  holy  Body  of 
the  Saviour  of  all  was  born,  how  then  is 
she  understood  to  be  Mother  of  God  ?  What 
then  did  she  bring  forth  except  it  be  true 
that  she  brought  forth  the  Emmanuel  accord- 
ing to  the  flesh  ?  They  are  to  be  laughed 
at  who  babble  such  things  about  me. 

For  the  blessed  prophet  Isaiah  does  not 
lie  in  saying  "  Behold  the  Virgin  shall  con- 
ceive and  bear  a  Son,  and  shall  call  his 
name  Emmanuel,  which  being  interpreted  is 
God  with  us."  Truly  also  the  holy  Gabriel 
said  to  the  Blessed  Virgin:  "Fear  not, 
Mary,  for  thou  hast  found  favour  with  God. 
And,  behold,  thou  shalt  conceive  in  thy 
womb,  and  bring  forth  a  Son,  and  shalt  call 
his  name  Jesus.  He  shall  save  his  people 
from  their  sins." 


For  when  we  say  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
descended  from  heaven,  and  from  above,  we 
do  not  so  say  this  as  if  from  above  and  from 
heaven  was  his  Holy  Flesh  taken,  but  rather 
by  way  of  following  the  divine  Paul,  who 
distinctly  declares :  "  The  first  man  is  of 
the  earth,  earthy;  the  Second  Man  is  the 
Lord  from  heaven." 

We  remember  too,  the  Saviour  himself 
saying,  "  And  no  man  hath  ascended  up  to 
heaven,  but  he  that  came  down  from  heaven, 
even  the  Son  of  Man."  Although  he  was 
born  according  to  his  flesh,  as  just  said, 
of  the  holy  Virgin,  yet  God  the  Word  came 
down  from  above  and  from  heaven.  He 
"  made  himself  of  no  reputation,  and  took 
upon  him  the  form  of  a  servant,"  and  was 
called  the  Son  of  Man,  yet  remaining  what 
he  was,  that  is  to  say  God.  For  he  is  un- 
changing and  unchangeable  according  to 
nature ;  considered  already  as  one  with  his 
own  Flesh,  he  is  said  to  have  come  down 
from  heaven. 

He  is  also  called  the  Man  from  heaven, 
being  perfect  in  his  Divinity  and  perfect  in 
his  Humanity,  and  considered  as  in  one 
Person.  For  one  is  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
although  the  difference  of  his  natures  is  not 
unknown,  from  which  we  say  the  ineffable 
union  was  made. 

Will  your  holiness  vouchsafe  to  silence 
those  who  say  that  a  crasis,  or  mingling  or 
mixture  took  place  between  the  Word  of 
God  and  flesh.  For  it  is  likely  that  certain 
also  gossip  about  me  as  having  thought  or 
said  such  things. 

But  I  am  far  from  any  such  thought  as 
that,  and  I  also  consider  them  wholly  to 
rave  who  think  a  shadow  of  change  could 
occur  concerning  the  Nature  of  the  Word 
of  God.  For  he  remains  that  Avhich  he  al- 
ways was,  and  has  not  been  changed,  nor 
can  he  ever  be  changed,  nor  is  he  capable  of 
change.  For  we  all  confess  in  addition  to 
this,  that  the  Word  of  God  is  impassible, 
even  though  when  he  dispenses  most  wisely 
this  mystery,  he  appears  to  ascribe  to  him- 
self the  sufferings  endured  in  his  own  flesh. 
To  the  same  purpose  the  all-wise  Peter  also 
said  when  he  wrote  of  Christ  as  having 
"  suffered  in  the  flesh,"  and  not  in  the  nat- 
ure of  his  ineffable  godhead.  In  order  that 
he  should  be  believed  to  be  the  Saviour  of 
all,  by  an  economic  appropriation  to  him- 
self, as  just  said,  he  assumed  the  sufferings 
of  his  own  Flesh. 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


253 


Like  to  this  is  the  prophecy  through  the 
voice  of  the  prophet,  as  from  him,  "  I  gave 
my  back  to  the  smiters,  and  my  cheeks  to 
them  that  plucked  off  the  hair :  I  hid  not 
my  face  from  shame  and  spitting."  Let 
your  holiness  be  convinced  nor  let  anyone 
else  be  doubtful  that  we  altogether  follow 
the  teachings  of  the  holy  fathers,  especially 
of  our  blessed  and  celebrated  Father  Athana- 
sius,  deprecating  the  least  departure  from  it. 

I  might  have  added  many  quotations 
from  them  also  establishing  my  words,  but 
that  it  would  have  added  to  the  length  of 
my  letter  and  it  might  become  wearisome. 
And  we  will  allow  the  defined  Faith,  the 
symbol  of  the  Faith  set  forth  by  our  holy 
Fathers  who  assembled  some  time  ago 
at  Nice,  to  be  shaken  by  no  one.  Nor 
would  we  permit  ourselves  or  others,  to 
alter  a  single  word  of  those  set  forth,  or  to 
add  one  syllable,  remembering  the  saying : 
"  Remove  not  the  ancient  landmark  which 
thy  fathers  have  set,"  for  it  was  not  they 
who  spoke  but  the  Spirit  himself  of  God 
and  the  Father,  who  proceedeth  also  from 
him,  and  is  not  alien  from  the  Son,  accord- 
ing to  his  essence.  And  this  the  words  of 
the  holy  initiators  into  mysteries  confirm  to 
us.    For  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  it  is 


written :  "  And  after  they  were  come  to 
Mysia,  they  assayed  to  go  into  Bithynia; 
but  the  Spirit  of  Jesus  suffered  them  not." 
And  the  divine  Paul  wrote :  "  So  then  they 
that  are  in  the  flesh  cannot  please  God. 
But  ye  are  not  in  the  flesh,  but  in  the  Spirit, 
if  so  be  that  the  Spirit  of  God  dwell  in  you. 
Now  if  any  man  have  not  the  Spirit  of 
Christ,  he  is  none  of  his." 

When  some  of  those  who  are  accustomed 
to  turn  from  the  right,  twist  my  speech  to 
their  views,  I  pray  your  holiness  not  to  won- 
der ;  but  be  well  assured  that  the  follow- 
ers of  every  heresy  gather  the  occasions  of 
their  error  from  the  God-inspired  Scriptures, 
corrupting  in  their  evil  minds  the  things 
rightly  said  through  the  Holy  Spirit,  and 
drawing  down  upon  their  own  heads  the 
unquenchable  flame. 

Since  we  have  learned  that  certain,  after 
having  corrupted  it,  have  set  forth  the  ortho- 
dox epistle  of  our  most  distinguished  Father 
Athanasius  to  the  Blessed  Epictetus,  so  as 
thereby  to  injure  many;  therefore  it  ap- 
peared to  the  brethren  to  be  useful  and 
necessary  that  we  should  send  to  your  holi- 
ness a  copy  of  it  from  some  correct  ancient 
transcripts  which  exist  among  us.  Fare- 
well. 


EXTRACTS  FROM  THE  ACTS. 

SESSION  II.  (continued). 


(L.  and  C,  Cone,  Tom.  IV.,  col.  343.) 


And  when  these  letters  [i.e.  Cyril's  letter 
to  Nestorius  KaTa<p\vapovai  and  his  letter 
to  John  of  Antioch  EvfypaLvea&uicrav]  had 
been  read,  the  most  reverend  bishops  cried 
out :  "We  all  so  believe  :  Pope  Leo  thus  be- 
lieves :  anathema  to  him  who  divides  and 
to  him  who  confounds  :  this  is  the  faith  of 
Archbishop  Leo :  Leo  thus  believes :  Leo 
and  Anatolius  so  believe  :  we  all  thus  be- 
lieve. As  Cyril  so  believe  we,  all  of  us : 
eternal  be  the  memory  of  Cyril :  as  the  epis- 
tles of  Cyril  teach  such  is  our  mind,  such 
has  been  our  faith  :  such  is  our  faith  :  this 


is  the  mind  of  Archbishop  Leo,  so  he  be- 
lieves, so  he  has  written. 

The  most  glorious  judges  and  the  great 
senate  said  :  Let  there  be  read  also  the 
epistle  of  the  most  Avorthy  Leo,  Archbishop 
of  Old  Borne,  the  Imperial  City. 

Beronician,  the  most  devout  clerk  of  the 
sacred  consistory,  read  from  a  book  handed 
him  by  Aetius,  Archdeacon  of  the  holy 
Church  of  Constantinople,  the  encyclical  or 
synodical  letter  of  the  most  holy  Leo,  the 
Archbishop,  written  to  Flavian,  Archbishop 
of  Constantinople. 


THE  TOME  OF  ST.  LEO. 


(Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  IV.,  col.  343 ;  also  Migne,  Pat.  Lai.,  Tom.  LIVV 

[Leo.  M.  Opera,  Tom.  I.]  col.  756.) x 


Leo  [the  bishop]  to  his  [most]  clear 
brother  Flavian. 

Having  read,  your  Affection's  letter,  the 
late  arrival  of  which  is  matter  of  sur- 
prise to  ns,  and  having  gone  through  the 
record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  bishops, 
we  have  now,  at  last,  gained  a  clear  vieAv 
of  the  scandal  which  has  risen  up  among 
you,  against  the  integrity  of  the  faith ;  and 
what  at  first  seemed  obscure  has  now  been 
elucidated  and  explained.  By  this  means 
Eutyches,  who  seemed  to  be  deserving  of 
honour  under  the  title  of  Presbyter,  is  now 
shown  to  be  exceedingly  thoughtless  and 
sadly  inexperienced,  so  that  to  him  also  we 
may  apply  the  prophet's  words,  "  He  re- 
fused to  understand  in  order  to  act  well : 
he  meditated  unrighteousness  on  his  bed." 
What,  indeed,  is  more  unrighteous  than  to 
entertain  ungodly  thoughts,  and  not  to  yield 
to  persons  wiser  and  more  learned  ?  But 
into  this  folly  do  they  fall  who,  when  hin- 
dered by  some  obscurity  from  apprehend- 
ing the  truth,  have  recourse,  not  to  the 
words  of  the  Prophets,  not  to  the  letters  of 
the  Apostles,  nor  to  the  authority  of  the 
Gospels,  but  to  themselves  ;  and  become 
teachers  of  error,  just  because  they  have 
not  been  disciples  of  the  truth.  For  what 
learning  has  he  received  from  the  sacred 
pages  of  the  New  and  the  Old  Testament, 
who  does  not  so  much  as  understand  the 
very  beginning  of  the  Creed?  And  that 
which,  all  the  world  over,  is  uttered  by  the 
voices  of  all  applicants  for  regeneration,  is 
still  not  graspect  by  the  mind  of  this  aged 
man.  If,  then,  he  knew  not  what  he  ought 
to  think  about  the  Incarnation  of  the  Word 
of  God,  and  was  not  willing,  for  the  sake  of 
obtaining  the  light  of  intelligence,  to  make 
laborious  search  through  the  whole  extent 
of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  he  should  at  least 
have  received  with  heedful  attention  that 
general  Confession  common  to  all,  whereby 
the  whole  body  of  the  faithful  profess  that 
they  "  believe  in  God  the  Father  Almighty, 

1  The  translation  here  given  is  that  of  Rev.  Wm.  Bright,  D.B., 
found  in  hie  Select  Sermons  of  S.  Leo  the  Great  on  the  Incarnation 
with  his  XXYIItth  Epistle  called  the  "  Tome,"    London,  1886. 


and  in  Jesus  Christ  his  only  Son  our  Lord, 
who  was  born  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  the 
Virgin  Mary."  By  Avhich  three  clauses  the 
engines  of  almost  all  heretics  are  shattered. 
For  Avhen  God  is  believed  to  be  both  "  Al- 
mighty "  and  "Father,"  it  is  proved  that 
the  Son  is  everlasting  together  with  him- 
self, differing  in  nothing  from  the  Father, 
because  he  was  born  as  "  God  from  God," 
Almighty  from  Almighty,  Coetemal  from 
Eternal ;  not  later  in  time,  not  inferior  in 
power,  not  unlike  him  in  glory,  not  divided 
from  him  in  essence,  but  the  same  Only- 
begotten  and  Everlasting  Son  of  an  Ever- 
lasting Parent  was  "  born  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
and  the  Virgin  Mary."  This  birth  in  time 
in  no  way  detracted  from,  in  no  way  added 
to,  that  divine  and  everlasting  birth ;  but 
expended  itself  wholly  in  the  work  of  re- 
storing man,  who  had  been  deceived  ;  so 
that  it  might  both  overcome  death,  and  by 
its  power  "  destroy  the  devil  who  had  the 
power  of  death."  For  we  could  not  have 
overcome  the  author  of  sin  and  of  death, 
unless  he  who  could  neither  be  contami- 
nated by  sin,  nor  detained  by  death,  had 
taken  upon  himself  our  nature,  and  made  it 
his  own.  For,  in  fact,  he  was  "conceived 
of  the  Holy  Ghost "  within  the  woinb  of  a 
Virgin  Mother,  who  bore  him  as  she  had 
conceived  him,  without  loss  of  virginity.3 
But  if  he  (Eutyches)  was  not  able  to  obtain 
a  true  conception  from  this  pure  fountain 
of  Christian  faith  because  by  his  own  blind- 
ness he  had  darkened  for  himself  the  bright- 
ness of  a  truth  so  clear,  he  should  have 
submitted  himself  to  the  Evangelist's  teach- 
ing ;  and  after  reading  what  Matthew  says, 
"  The  book  of  the  generation  of  Jesus 
Christ,  the  Son  of  David,  the  Son  of  Abra- 
ham," he  should  also  have  sought  instruc- 
tion from  the  Apostle's  preaching ;  and 
after  reading  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans, 
"  Paul,  a  servant  of  Jesus  Christ,  called  an 
Apostle,  separated  unto  the  gospel  of  God, 
which  he  had  promised  before  by  the 
prophets  in  the  Holy  Scriptures,  concerning 

2  It  will  be  noticed  here  that  the  virgin-birth  is  as  distinctly 
defined  as  the  virgin-conception. 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


255 


his  Son,  "\vlio  was  made  unto  him  of  the 
seed  of  David  according  to  the  flesh,"  he 
should  have  bestowed  some  devout  study 
on  the  pages  of  the  Prophets  ;  and  finding 
that  God's  promise  said  to  Abraham,  "in 
thy  seed  shall  all  nations  be  blessed,"  in 
order  to  avoid  all  doubt  as  to  the  proper 
meaning  of  this  "  seed,"  he  should  have  at- 
tended to  the  Apostle's  words,  "  To  Abra- 
ham and  to  his  seed  were  the  promises 
made.  He  saith  not,  '  and  to  seeds,'  as  in 
the  case  of  many,  but  as  in  the  case  of  one, 
'and  to  thy  seed,'  which  is  Christ."  He 
should  also  have  apprehended  with  his  in- 
ward ear  the  declaration  of  Isaiah,  "  Be- 
hold, a  Virgin  shall  conceive  and  bear  a 
Son,  and  they  shall  call  his  name  Emman- 
uel, which  is,  being  interpreted,  God  with 
us ;  "  and  should  have  read  with  faith  the 
words  of  the  same  prophet,  "  Unto  us  a 
Child  has  been  born,  unto  us  a  Son  has 
been  given,  whose  power  is  on  his  shoul- 
der ;  and  they  shall  call  his  name  Angel  of 
great  counsel,  Wonderful,  Counsellor,  Strong 
God,  Prince  of  Peace,  Father  of  the  age  to 
come."  And  he  should  not  have  spoken 
idly  to  the  effect  that  the  Word  was  in  such 
a  sense  made  flesh,  that  the  Christ  who 
was  brought  forth  from  the  Virgin's  womb 
had  the  form  of  a  man,  and  had  not  a  body 
really  derived  from  his  Mother's  body. 
Possibly  his  reason  for  thinking  that  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  was  not  of  our  nature 
was  this — that  the  Angel  who  was  sent  to 
the  blessed  and  ever  Virgin  Mary  said, 
"  The  Holy  Ghost  shall  come  upon  thee, 
and  the  power  of  the  Highest  shall  over- 
shadow thee,  and  therefore  also  that  holy 
thing  which  shall  be  born  of  thee  shall  be 
called  the  Son  of  God ;  "  as  if,  because  the 
Virgin's  conception  was  caused  by  a  divine 
act,  therefore  the  flesh  of  him  whom  she 
conceived  was  not  of  the  nature  of  her  who 
conceived  him.  But  we  are  not  to  under- 
stand that  "  generation,"  peerlessly  wonder- 
ful, and  wonderfully  peerless,  in  such  a 
sense  as  that  the  newness  of  the  mode  of 
production  did  away  with  the  proper  char- 
acter of  the  kind.  For  it  Avas  the  Holy 
Ghost  who  gave  fecundity  to  the  Virgin, 
but  it  was  from  a  body  that  a  real  bodj' 
was  derived ;  and  "  when  Wisdom  was 
building  herself  a  house,"  the  "  Word  was 
made  flesh,  and  dwelt  among  us,"  that  is, 
in  that  flesh  which  he  assumed  from  a  hu- 
man being,  and  which  he  animated  with 


the  spirit  of  rational  life.  Accordingly, 
while  the  distinctness  of  both  natures  and 
substances  was  preserved,  and  both  met 
in  one  Person,  lowliness  was  assumed  by 
majesty,  weakness  by  power,  mortality  by 
eternity ;  and,  in  order  to  pay  the  debt 
of  our  condition,  the  inviolable  nature  was 
united  to  the  passible,  so  that  as  the  ap- 
propriate remedy  for  our  ills,  one  and  the 
same  "  Mediator  between  God  and  man, 
the  Man  Christ  Jesus,"  might  from  one 
element  be  capable  of  dying  and  also  from 
the  other  be  incapable.  Therefore  in  the 
entire  and  perfect  nature  of  very  man  was 
born  very  God,  whole  in  what  was  his, 
whole  in  what  was  ours.  By  "  ours  "  we 
mean  what  the  Creator  formed  in  us  at  the 
beginning  and  what  he  assumed  in  order 
to  restore  ;  for  of  that  which  the  deceiver 
brought  in,  and  man,  thus  deceived,  admit- 
ted, there  was  not  a  trace  in  the  Saviour ; 
and  the  fact  that  he  took  on  himself  a  share 
in  our  infirmities  did  not  make  him  a  par- 
taker in  our  transgressions.  He  assumed 
"  the  form  of  a  servant  "  without  the  defile- 
ment of  sin,  enriching  what  was  human,  not 
impairing  what  Avas  divine  :  because  that 
"  emptying  of  himself,"  whereby  the  Invisi- 
ble made  himself  visible,  and  the  Creator 
and  Lord  of  all  things  willed  to  be  one 
among  mortals,  was  a  stooping  down  in 
compassion,  not  a  failure  of  power.  Ac- 
cordingly, the  same  who,  remaining  in  the 
form  of  God,  made  man,  was  made  man  in 
the  form  of  a  servant.  For  each  of  the 
natures  retains  its  proper  character  without 
defect ;  and  as  the  form,  of  God  does  not 
take  aAvay  the  form  of  a  servant,  so  the  form 
of  a  servant  does  not  impair  the  form  of 
God.  For  since  the  devil  was  glorying  in 
the  fact  that  man,  deceived  by  his  craft, 
Avas  bereft  of  divine  gifts  and,  being  stripped 
of  his  endowment  of  immortality,  had  come 
under  the  grievous  sentence  of  death,  and 
that  he  himself,  amid  his  miseries,  had 
found  a  sort  of  consolation  in  having  a 
transgressor  as  his  companion,  and  that 
God,  according  to  the  requirements  of  the 
principle  of  justice,  had  changed  his  OAvn 
resolution  in  regard  to  man,  whom  he  had 
created  in  so  high  a  position  of  honour; 
there  was  need  of  a  dispensation  of  secret 
counsel,  in  order  that  the  unchangeable 
God,  Avhose  will  could  not  be  deprived  of 
its  own  benignity,  should  fulfil  by  a  more 
secret  mystery  his  original  plan  of  loving 


25G 


CIIALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


kindness  toward  us,  and  that  man,  who  had 
been  led  into  fault  by  the  wicked  subtlety 
of  the  devil,  should  not  perish  contrary  to 
God's  purpose.  Accordingly,  the  Son  of 
God,  descending  from  his  seat  in  heaven, 
and  not  departing  from  the  glory  of  the 
Father,  enters  this  lower  world,  born  after 
a  new  order,  by  a  new  mode  of  birth.  After 
a  new  order;  because. he  who  in  his  own 
sphere  is  invisible,  became  visible  in  ours ; 
He  who  could  not  be  enclosed  in  space, 
willed  to  be  enclosed ;  continuing  to  be 
before  times,  he  began  to  exist  in  time  ;  the 
Lord  of  the  universe  allowed  his  infinite 
majesty  to  be  overshadowed,  and  took  upon 
him  the  form  of  a  servant ;  the  impassible 
God  did  not  disdain  to  be  passible  Man, 
and  the  immortal  One  to  be  subjected. to 
the  laws  of  death.  And  born  by  a  new 
mode  of  birth  ;  because  inviolate  virginity, 
while  ignorant  of  concupiscence,  supplied 
the  matter  of  his  flesh.  What  was  assumed 
from  the  Lord's  mother  Avas  nature,  not 
fault ;  nor  does  the  wondrousness  of  the 
nativity  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  as  born 
of  a  Virgin's  womb,  imply  that  his  nature 
is  unlike  ours.  For  the  selfsame  who  is 
very  God,  is  also  very  man  ;  and  there  is  no 
illusion  in  this  union,  while  the  lowliness  of 
man  and  the  loftiness  of  Godhead  meet  to- 
gether. For  as  "  God  "  is  not  changed  by 
the  compassion  [exhibited],  so  "Man"  is 
not  consumed  by  the  dignity  [bestowed]. 
For  each  "  form  "  does  the  acts  which  be- 
long to  it,  in  communion  with  the  other ; 
the  Word,  that  is,  performing  what  belongs 
to  the  Word,  and  the  flesh  carrying  out 
what  belongs  to  the  flesh ;  the  one  of  these 
shines  out  in  miracles,  the  other  succumbs 
to  injuries.  And  as  the  Word  does  not 
withdraw  from  equality  with  the  Father  in 
glory,  so  the  flesh  does  not  abandon  the 
nature  of  our  kind.  For,  as  we  must  often 
be  saying,  he  is  one  and  the  same,  truly 
Son  of  God,  and  truly  Son  of  Man.  God, 
inasmuch  as  "  in  the  beginning  Avas  the 
Word,  and  the  Word  was  Avith  God,  and 
the  Word  was  God."  Man,  inasmuch  as 
"  the  Word  was  made  flesh,  and  dwelt 
among  us."  God,  inasmuch  as  "all  things 
Avere  made  by  him,  and  without  him  noth- 
ing was  made."  Man,  inasmuch  as  he  AAras 
"  made  of  a  woman,  made  under  the  law." 
The  nativity  of  the  flesh  is  a  manifestation 
of  human  nature ;  the  Virgin's  child-bear- 
ing is  an  indication  of  Divine  poAYer.     The 


infancy  of  the  Babe  is  exhibited  by  the  hu- 
miliation of  sAvaddling  clothes  :  the  great- 
ness of  the  Highest  is  declared  by  the 
voices  of  angels.  He  Avhom  Herod  impi- 
ously designs  to  slay  is  like  humanity  in  its 
beginnings  ;  but  he  whom  the  Magi  rejoice 
to  adore  on  their  knees  is  Lord  of  all.  Now 
Avhen  he  came  to  the  baptism  of  John  his 
forerunner,  lest  the  fact  that  the  Godhead 
Avas  covered  with  a  veil  of  flesh  should  be 
concealed,  the  voice  of  the  Father  spake  in 
thunder  from  heaven,  "  This  is  my  beloved 
Son,  in  Avhom  I  am  Avell  pleased."  Accord- 
ingly, he  who,  as  man,  is  tempted  by  the 
devil's  subtlety,  is  the  same  to  Avhom,  as 
God,  angels  pay  duteous  service.  To  hun- 
ger, to  thirst,  to  be  Aveary,  and  to  sleep,  is 
evidently  human.  But  to  satisfy  five  thou- 
sand men  Avith  five  loaves,  and  give  to  the 
Samaritan  woman  that  living  water,  to  draw 
which  can  secure  hini  that  drinks  of  it 
from  ever  thirsting  again ;  to  walk  on  the 
surface  of  the  sea  with  feet  that  sink  not, 
and  by  rebuking  the  storm  to  bring  doAvn 
the  "uplifted  Avaves,"  is  unquestionably 
Divine.  As  then — to  pass  by  many  points 
— it  does  not  belong  to  the  same  natm'e 
to  Aveep  with  feelings  of  pity  over  a  dead 
friend  and,  after  the  mass  of  stone  had  been 
remoAred  from  the  gra\Te  where  he  had  lain 
four  days,  by  a  voice  of  command  to  raise 
him  up  to  life  again ;  or  to  hang  on  the 
Avood,  and  to  make  all  the  elements  tremble 
after  daylight  had  been  turned  into  night ; 
or  to  be  transfixed  with  nails,  and  to  open 
the  gates  of  paradise  to  the  faith  of  the 
robber  ;  so  it  does  not  belong  to  the  same 
nature  to  say,  "I  and  the  Father  are  one," 
and  to  say,  "  the  Father  is  greater  than  I." 
For  although  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
there  is  one  Person  of  God  and  man,  yet 
that  whereby  contumely  attaches  to  both  is 
one  thing,  and  that  whereby  glory  attaches 
to  both  is  another  ;  for  from  Avhat  belongs 
to  us  he  has  that  manhood  which  is  inferior 
to  the  Father;  while  from  the  Father  he 
has  equal  Godhead  with  the  Father.  Ac- 
cordingly, on  account  of  this  unity  of  Per- 
son which  is  to  be  understood  as  existing  in 
both  the  natures,  we  read,  on  the  one  hand, 
that  "  the  Son  of  Man  came  down  from 
heaven,"  inasmuch  as  the  Son  of  God  took 
flesh  from  that  Virgin  of  whom  he  was 
born ;  and  on  the  other  hand,  the  Son  of 
God  is  said  to  have  been  crucified  and  bur- 
ied, inasmuch  as  he  underwent  this,  not  in 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


357 


his  actual  Godhead ;  wherein  the  Only- 
begotten  is  coeternal  and  consubsfrantial 
with  the  Father,  but  in  the  Aveakness  of 
human  nature.  Wherefore  we  all,  in  the 
very  Creed,  coufess  that  "  the  only-begotten 
Son  of  God  was  crucified  and  buried,"  ac- 
cording to  that  saying  of  the  Apostle,  "  for 
if  they  had  known  it,  they  would  not  have 
crucified  the  Lord  of  Majesty."  But  when 
our  Lord  and  Saviour  himself  was  by  his 
questions  instructing  the  faith  of  the  disci- 
ples, he  said,  "Whom  do  men  say  that  I  the 
Son  of  Man  am  ?  "  And  when  they  had 
mentioned  various  opinions  held  by  others, 
he  said,  "But  whom  say  ye  that  I  am?  "  that 
is,  "  I  who  am  Son  of  Man,  and  whom  you 
see  in  the  form  of  a  servant,  and  in  reality 
of  flesh,  whom  say  ye  that  I  am  ?  "  Where- 
upon the  blessed  Peter,  as  inspired  by  God, 
and  about  to  benefit  all  nations  by  his  con- 
fession, said,  "  Thou  art  the  Christ,  the  Son 
of  the  living  God."  Not  undeservedly, 
therefore,  was  he  pronounced  blessed  by 
the  Lord,  and  derived  from  the  original 
Rock  that  solidity  which  belonged  both  to 
his  virtue  and  to  his  name,  who  through 
revelation  from  the  Father  confessed  the 
selfsame  to  be  both  the  Son  of  God  and  the 
Christ ;  because  one  of  these  truths,  ac- 
cepted without  the  other,  would  not  profit 
unto  salvation,  and  it  was  equally  danger- 
ous to  believe  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  to  be 
merely  God  and  not  man,  or  merely  man 
and  not  God.  But  after  the  resurrection  of 
the  Lord — which  was  in  truth  the  resurrec- 
tion of  a  real  body,  for  no  other  person  was 
raised  again  than  he  who  had  been  crucified 
and  had  died — what  else  was  accomplished 
during  that  interval  of  forty  days  than  to 
make  our  faith  entire  and  clear  of  all  dark- 
ness ?  For  while  he  conversed  with  his  dis- 
ciples, and  dwelt  with  them,  and  ate  with 
them,  and  allowed  himself  to  be  handled 
with  careful  and  inquisitive  touch  by  those 
who  were  under  the  influence  of  doubt,  for 
this  end  he  came  in  to  the  disciples  when 
the  doors  were  shut,  and  by  his  breath 
gave  them  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  opened  the 
secrets  of  Holy  Scripture  after  bestowing 
on  them  the  light  of  intelligence,  and  again 
in  his  selfsame  person  showed  to  them  the 
wound  in  the  side,  the  prints  of  the  nails, 
and  all  the  fresh  tokens  of  the  Passion,  say- 
ing, "  Behold  my  hands  and  my  feet,  that 
it  is  I  myself  ;  handle  me  and  see,  for  a 
spirit  hath  not  flesh  and  bones,  as  ye  see  me 
VOL.  xiv. 


have  :  "  that  the  properties  of  the  Divine 
and  the  human  nature  might  be  acknowl- 
edged to  remain  in  him  without  causing  a 
division,  and  that  we  might  in  such  sort 
know  that  the  Word  is  not  what  the  flesh 
is,  as  to  confess  that  the  one  Son  of  God  is 
both  Word  and  flesh.  On  Avhich  mystery 
of  the  faith  this  Eutyches  must  be  regard- 
ed as  unhappily  having  no  hold,  who  does 
not  recognise  our  nature  to  exist  in  the 
Only-begotten  Son  of  God,  either  by  way 
of  the  lowliness  of  mortality,  or  of  the  glory 
of  resurrection.  Nor  has  he  been  ovei-awed 
by  the  declaration  of  the  blessed  Apostle 
and  Evangelist  John,  saying,  "  Every  spirit 
that  confesseth  that  Jesus  Christ  has  come 
in  the  flesh  is  of  God ;  and  every  spirit 
which  dissolveth  Jesus  is  not  of  God,  and 
this  is  Antichrist."  Now  what  is  to  dis- 
solve Jesus,  but  to  separate  the  human  nat- 
ure from  him,  and  to  make  void  by  shame- 
less inventions  that  mystery  by  which  alone 
we  have  been  saved?  Moreover,  being  in 
the  dark  as  to  the  nature  of  Christ's  body, 
he  must  needs  be  involved  in  the  like  sense- 
less blindness  with  regard  to  his  Passion 
also.  For  if  he  does  not  think  the  Lord's 
crucifixion  to  be  unreal,  and  does  not  doubt 
that  he  really  accepted  suffering,  even  unto 
death,  for  the  sake  of  the  world's  salvation ; 
as  he  believes  in  his  death,  let  him  acknowl- 
edge his  flesh  also,  and  not  doubt  that  he 
whom  he  recognises  as  having  been  capable 
of  suffering  is  also  Man  with  a  body  like 
ours  ;  since  to  deny  his  true  flesh  is  also  to 
deny  his  bodily  sufferings.  If  then  he  ac- 
cepts the  Christian  faith,  and  does  not  turn 
away  his  ear  from  the  preaching  of  the 
Gospel,  let  him  see  what  nature  it  was  that 
was  transfixed  with  nails  and  hung  on  the 
wood  of  the  cross  ;  and  let  him  understand 
whence  it  was  that,  after  the  side  of  the 
Crucified  had  been  pierced  by  the  soldier's 
spear,  blood  and  water  flowed  out,  that  the 
Church  of  God  might  be  refreshed  both 
|  with  a  Laver  and  with  a  Cup.  Let  him 
listen  also  to  the  blessed  Apostle  Peter 
when  he  declares,  that  "  sanctification  by 
the  Spirit  "  takes  place  through  the  "  sprin- 
kling of  the  blood  of  Christ,"  and  let  him 
not  give  a  mere  cursory  reading  to  the 
words  of  the  same  Apostle,  "Knowing  that 
ye  were  not  redeemed  with  corruptible 
things,  as  silver  and  gold,  from  your  vain 
way  of  life  received  by  tradition  from  your 
fathers,  but  with  the  precious  blood  of  Jesus 


258 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


Christ  as  of  a  Lamb  without  blemish  and 
without  spot."  Let  him  also  not  resist  the 
testimony  of  Blessed  John  the  Apostle, 
"  And  the  blood  of  Jesns  the  Son  of  God 
cleanseth  us  from  all  sin."  And  again, 
"  This  is  the  victory  which  overcometh  the 
world,  even  our  faith ; "  and,  "  "who  is  he  that 
overcometh  the  world,  but  he  that  believeth 
that  Jesus  is  the  Son  of  God  ?  This  is  he 
that  came  by  water  and  blood,  even  Jesus 
Christ ;  not  in  water  only,  but  in  water  and 
blood  ;  and  it  is  the  Spirit  that  beareth  wit- 
ness, because  the  Spirit  is  truth.  For  there 
are  three  that  bear  witness — the  Spirit,  the 
water,  and  the  blood ;  and  the  three  are 
one."  That  is,  the  Spirit  of  sanctification, 
and  the  blood  of  redemption,  and  the  water 
of  baptism  ;  which  three  things  are  one,  and 
remain  undivided,  and  not  one  of  them  is 
disjoined  from  connection  with  the  others  ; 
because  the  Catholic  Church  lives  and  ad- 
vances by  this  faith,  that  in  Christ  Jesus 
we  should  believe  neither  manhood  to  exist 
without  true  Godhead,  nor  Godhead  with- 
out true  manhood.  But  when  Eutyches, 
on  being  questioned  in  your  examination  of 
him,  answered,  "I  confess  that  our  Lord 
was  of  two  natures  before  the  union,  but 
after  the  union  I  confess  one  nature  ; "  I  am 
astonished  that  so  absurd  and  perverse  a 
profession  as  this  of  his  was  not  rebuked  by 
a  censure  on  the  part  of  any  of  his  judges, 
and  that  an  utterance  extremely  foolish  and 
extremely  blasphemous  was  passed  over, 
just  as  if  nothing  had  been  heard  which 
could  give  offence  :  seeing  that  it  is  as  im- 
pious to  say  that  the  Only-begotten  Son  of 
God  was  of  two  natures  before  the  Incarna- 
tion as  it  is  shocking  to  affirm  that,  since 
the  Word  became  flesh,  there  has  been  in 
him  one  nature  only.  But  lest  Eut}7ches 
should  think  that  what  he  said  was  correct, 
or  was  tolerable,  because  it  was  not  confuted 
by  any  assertion  of  yours,  we  exhort  your 
earnest  solicitude,  dearly  beloved  brother, 
to  see  that,  if  by  God's  merciful  inspiration 
the  case  is  brought  to  a  satisfactory  issue, 
the  inconsiderate  and  inexperienced  man  be 
cleansed  also  from  this  pestilent  notion  of 
his ;  seeing  that,  as  the  record  of  the  pro- 
ceedings has  clearly  shown,  he  had  fairly 


begun  to  abandon  his  own  opinion  when 
on  being  driven  into  a  comer  by  authorita- 
tive Avords  of  yours,  he  professed  himself 
ready  to  say  what  he  had  not  said  before, 
and  to  give  his  adhesion  to  that  faith  from 
which  he  had  previously  stood  aloof.  But 
when  he  would  not  consent  to  anathematize 
the  impious  dogma  you  understood,  brother, 
that  he  continued  in  his  own  misbelief,  and 
deserved  to  receive  sentence  of  condemna- 
tion. Eor  which  if  he  grieves  sincerely  and 
to  good  purpose,  and  understands,  even 
though  too  late,  how  properly  the  Episco- 
pal authority  has  been  put  in  motion,  or  if, 
in  order  to  make  full  satisfaction,  he  shall 
condemn  viva  voce,  and  under  his  own  hand, 
all  that  he  has  held  amiss,  no  compassion, 

!  to  whatever  extent,  which  can  be  shown  him 
when  he  has  been  set  right,  will  be  worthy 

i  of  blame,  for  our  Lord,  the  true  and  good 
Shepherd,  who  laid  down  his  life  for  his 
sheep,  and  who  came  to  save  men's  souls 
and  not  to  destroy  them,  wills  us  to  imi- 
tate his  own  loving  kindness ;  so  that  jus- 
tice should  indeed  constrain  those  who  sin, 

'  but  mercy  should  not  reject  those  who  are 
converted.  Eor  theu  indeed  is  the  true 
faith  defended  with  the  best  results,  when 
a  false  opinion  is  condemned  even  by  those 

\  who  have  followed  it.     But  in  order  that 

j  the  whole  matter  may  be  piously  and  faith- 
fully carried  out,  we  have  appointed  our 
brethren,  Julius,  Bishop,  and  Beatus,  Pres- 
byter (of  the  title  of  St.  Clement)  and  also 
my  son  Hilarus,  Deacon,  to  represent  us ; 
and  with  them  we  have  associated  Dulci- 
tius,  our  Notary,  of  whose  fidelity  we  have 
had  good  proof :  trusting  that  the  Divine 
assistance  will  be  with  you,  so  that  he  who 
has  gone  astray  may  be  saved  by  condemn- 
ing his  own  unsound  opinion.  May  God 
keep  you  in  good  health,  dearly  beloved 
brother.  Given  on  the  Ides  of  June,  in  the 
Consulate  of  the  illustrious  men,  Asterius 
and  Protogenes. 


[Next  was  read  a  long  catena  of  quota- 
tions from  the  Fathers  sustaining  the  teach- 
ing of  the  Tome.  (L.  and  C,  Cone,  Tom. 
IV.,  cols.  357-368.)] 


EXTRACTS   FROM   THE   ACTS. 


SESSION  II.    {continued). 
(Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  IV.,  col.  368.) 


After  the  reading  of  the  foregoing  epis- 
tle, the  most  reverend  bishops  cried  out : 
This  is  the  faith  of  the  fathers,  this  is  the 
faith  of  the  Apostles.  So  we  all  believe, 
thus  the  orthodox  believe.  Anathema  to 
him  who  does  not  thus  believe.  Peter 
has  spoken  thus  through  Leo.  So  taught 
the  Apostles.  Piously  and  truly  did  Leo 
teach,  so  taught  Cyril.  Everlasting  be  the 
memory  of  Cyril.  Leo  and  Cyril  taught 
the  same  thing,  anathema  to  him  who  does 
not  so  believe.  This  is  the  true  faith.  Those 
of  us  who  are  orthodox  thus  believe.    This 


is  the  faith  of  the  fathers.  Why  were  not 
these  things  read  at  Ephesus  [i.e.  at  the 
heretical  synod  held  there]  ?  These  are  the 
things  Dioscorus  hid  away. 

[Some  explanations  were  asked  by  the 
Illyrian  bishops  and  the  answers  were  found 
satisfactory,  bid  yet  a  delay  of  a  feio  days 
was  ashed  for,  and  some  bishops  petitioned  for 
a  general  pardon  of  cdl  who  had  been  kept 
out.  This  proposition  made  greed  confusion, 
in  the  midst  of  which  the  session  teas  dis- 
solved by  the  judges.     (Col.  371.)  ] 


SESSION  III. 


[The  imperial  representatives  do  not  seem  to  have  been  present,  and  after  Aetius  the 
Archdeacon  of  Constantinople  had  opened  the  Session,] 


Paschasinus  the  bishop  of  Lilybpeum,  in 
the  province  of  Silicia,  and  holding  the 
place  of  the  most  holy  Leo,  archbishop  of 
the  Apostolic  see  of  old  Rome,  said  in 
Latin  what  being  interpreted  is  as  follows : 
It  is  well  known  to  this  beloved  of  God 
synod,  that  divine x  letters  were  sent  to  the 
blessed  and  apostolic  pope  Leo,  inviting 
him  to  deign  to  be  present  at  the  holy 
synod.  But  since  ancient  custom  did  not 
sanction  this,  nor  the  general  necessity  of  the 
time  seemed  to  permit  it,  our  littleness  in 
the  place  of  himself  he  ra  t?}?  ay/a?  avvohov 
eirerpz^re,  and  therefore  it  is  necessary  that 
whatever  things  are  brought  into  discussion 
should  be  examined  by  our  interference 
(SiaXaXid'i).  [The  Latin  reads  where  I  have 
placed  the  Greek  of  the  ordinary  text,  thus, 
"  commanded  our  littleness  to  preside  in 
his  place  over  this  holy  council."]  There- 
fore let  the  book  presented  by  our  most 
beloved-of-God  brother,  and  fellow-bishop 
Eusebius  be  received,  and  read  by  the 
beloved  of  God  archdeacon  and  primicerius 
of  the  notaries,  Aetius. 

And  Aetius,  the  archdeacon  and  primi- 
cerius of  the  notaries,  took  the  book  and 
read  as  follows. 


1  j.  e.  Imperial. 


[Next  folloios  the  petition  of  Eusebius  et 
post  nonnulla  four  petitions  each  addressed 
to  "The  most  holy  and  beloved-of-God 
ecumenical  archbishop  and  patriarch  of 
great  Rome  Leo,  and  to  the  holy  and 
ecumenical  Synod  assembled  at  Chalcedon, 
etc.,  etc. ; "  The  first  two  by  deacons  of 
Alexandria,  the  third  by  a  quondam  pres- 
byter of  the  diocese,  and  the  fourth  by  a 
layman  also  of  Alexandria.  After  this 
Dioscorus  was  again  summoned  and,  as  he 
did  not  come,  sentence  was  given  against 
him,  which  was  communicated  to  him  in  a 
letter  contained  in  the  acts.  (L.  and  C, 
Cone,  Tom  IV.,  col.  418.)  The  Bishops 
expressed  their  opinions  for  the  most  part 
one  by  one,  bid  the  Roman  Legates  spohe 
together,  and  in  their  speech  occurs  the  fol- 
lowing (Col.  426  :)  ] 

Wherefore  the  most  holy  and  blessed 
Leo,  archbishop  of  the  great  and  elder 
Rome,  through  us,  and  through  this  pre- 
sent most  holy  synod  together  with2  the 
thrice  blessed  and  all-glorious  Peter  the 
Apostle,  who  is  the  rock  and  foundation  of 
the  Catholic  Church,  and  the  foundation  of 


2  The  translation  of  the  English  Hefele  (iv.  328)  "in  commun- 
ion with  "  is  most  extraordinary. 


S  2 


2G0 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


the  orthodox  faith,  hath  stripped  him  of  the  I  favour  of  the  deposition  of  Dioscorus,  but 
episcopate,  and  hath  alienated  from  him  usually  on   the  ground  of  his  refusal  to 
all  hieratic  worthiness.     Therefore  let  this  j  appear  when  thrice  summoned.] 
most  holy  and  great  synod  sentence  the 
before  mentioned  Dioscorus  to  the  canoni- 
cal penalties.  And  when  all  the  most  holy  bishops  had 

spoken   on  the   subject,  they  signed   this 
[The  bishops  then,  one  by  one,  spoke  in  \  which  follows. 


THE     CONDEMNATION    SENT     BY     THE     HOLY    AND      ECUMENICAL 

SYNOD  TO  DIOSCOEUS. 


(Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  IV.,  col.  459.) 


The  holy  and  great  and  ecumenical 
Synod,  which  by  the  grace  of  God  accord- 
ing to  the  constitution  of  our  most  pious 
and  beloved  of  God  emperors  assembled 
together  at  Chalcedom  the  city  of  Bithy- 
nia,  in  the  martyry  of  the  most  holy  and 
victorious  Martyr  Euphemia  to  Dioscorus. 

We  do  you  to  wit  that  on  the  thirteenth 
day  of  the  month  of  October  you  were 
deposed  from  the  episcopate  and  made  a 


stranger  to  all  ecclesiastical  order  (3-ea-fiov) 
by  the  holy  and  ecumenical  synod,  on  ac- 
count of  your  disregard  of  the  divine  can- 
ons, and  of  your  disobedience  to  this  holy 
and  ecumenical  synod  and  on  account  of 
the  other  crimes  of  which  you  have  been 
found  guilty,  for  even  when  called  to  an- 
swer your  accusers  three  times  by  this  holy 
and  great  synod  according  to  the  divine 
canons  you  did  not  come. 


EXTRACTS  FROM  THE  ACTS. 


SESSION    IV. 


(Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  IV.,  col.  469.) 


The  most  magnificent  and  glorious 
judges  and  the  great  Senate  said : 

Let  the  reverend  council  now  declare 
what  seems  good  concerning  the  faith,  since 
those  things  Avhich  have  already  been  dis- 
posed of  have  been  made  manifest.  Pascha- 
sinus  and  Lucentius,  the  most  reverend 
bishops,  and  Boniface  the  most  reverend 
presbyter,  legates  of  the  Apostolic  See, 
through  that  most  reverend  man,  bishop 
Paschasinus  said :  As  the  holy  and  blessed 
and  Ecumenical  Synod  holds  fast  and  fol- 
lows the  rule  of  faith  (fdei  rcgulam  in  the 
Latin  Acts)  which  Avas  set  forth  by  the 
fathers  at  Nice,  it  also  confirms  the  faith 
set  forth  by  the  Synod  of  150  fathers 
gathered  at  Constantinople  at  the  bidding 
of  the  great  Theodosius  of  blessed  memory. 
Moreover  the  exposition  of  their  faith,  of 
the  illustrious  Cyril  of  blessed  memory  set 
forth  at  the  Council  of  Ephesus  (in  which 


Nestorius  was  condemned)  is  received.  And 
in  the  third  place  the  writings  of  that  blessed 
man,  Leo,  Archbishop  of  all  the  churches, 
who  condemned  the  heresy  of  Nestorius 
and  Eutyches,  shew  what  the  true  faith  is. 
Likewise  the  holy  Synod  holds  this  faith, 
this  it  follows — nothing  further  can  it  add 
nor  can  it  take  aught  away. 

When  this  had  been  translated  into  Greek 
by  Beronician,  the  devout  secretary  of  the 
divine  consistory,  the  most  reverend  bish- 
ops cried  out :  So  we  all  believe,  so  we 
were  baptized,  so  we  baptize,  so  we  have 
believed,  so  we  now  believe. 

The  most  glorious  judges  and  the  great 
senate  said  :  Since  we  see  that  the  Holy 
Gospels  have  been  placed  alongside  of  your 
holiness,  let  each  one  of  the  bishops  here 
assembled  declare  whether  the  epistle  of 
most  blessed  archbishop  Leo  is  in  accord- 
ance with  the  exposition  of  the  318  fathers 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


2G1 


assembled  at  Nice  and  with  the  decrees  of 
the  150  fathers  afterwards  assembled  in 
the  royal  city. 

[To  this  question  the  bishops  answered  one 
by  one,  until  161  separate  opinions  had  been 
given,  when  the  rest  of  the  bishops  were  ashed 


by  the  imperial  judges  to  give  their  votes  in  a 
body  {col  508).  ] 

All  the  most  reverend  bishops  cried  out : 
We  all  acquiesce,  we  all  believe  thus ;  we 
are  all  of  the  same  mind.  So  are  we  mind- 
ed, so  we  believe,  etc.,  etc. 


SESSION  V. 
(Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  IV.,  col.  555.) 


Paschasinus  and  Lucentius  the  most 
reverend  bishops  and  Boniface  a  presbyter, 
vicars  of  the  Apostolic  See  of  Borne,  said  : 
If  they  do  not  agree  to  the  letter  of  that 
apostolic  and  blessed  man,  Pope  Leo,  give 
directions  that  we  be  given  our  letters  of 
dismission,  and  let  a  synod  be  held  there 
[i.  e.  in  the  West]. 

[A  long  debate  then  followed  as  to  whether 
the  decree  drawn  up  and  presented  should  be 
accepted.  This  seems  to  have  been  the  mind 
of  most  of  the  bishops.  At  last  the  com- 
missioners proposed  a  committee  of  twenty- 
two  to  meet  with  them  and  report  to  the  coun- 
cil, and  the  Emperor  imposed  this  with  the 
threat  that  otherwise  they  all  should  be  sent 
home  and  a  new  council  called  in  the  West. 
Even  this  did  not  make  them  yield  (col.  560.)] 

The  most  reverend  bishops  cried  out : 
Many  years  to  the  Emperor  !  Either  let 
the  definition  [i.e.  the  one  presented  at  this 
session]  stand  or  we  go.  Many  years  to  the 
Emperor ! 

Oecropius,  the  most  reverend  bishop  of 
Sebastopol,  said :  We  ask  that  the  defi- 
nition be  read  again  and  that  those  who 
dissent  from  it,  and  will  not  sign,  may  go 
about  their  business  ;  for  we  give  our  con- 
sent to  these  things  which  have  been  so 
beautifully  drafted,  and  make  no  criticisms. 


The  most  blessed  bishops  of  Illyria  said : 
Let  those  who  contradict  be  made  manifest. 
Those  who  contradict  are  Nestorians.  Those 
who  contradict,  let  them  go  to  Borne. 

The  most  magnificent  and  most  glorious 
judges  said  :  Dioscorus  acknowledged  that 
he  accepted  the  expression  "  of  two  natures," 
but  not  that  there  were  two  natures.  But 
the  most  holy  archbishop  Leo  says  that 
there  are  two  natures  in  Christ  unchange- 
ably, inseparably,  unconfusedly  united  in 
the  one  only-begotten  Son  our  Saviour. 
Which  would  you  follow,  the  most  holy  Leo 
or  Dioscorus  ? 

The  most  reverend  bishops  cried  out : 
We  believe  as  Leo.  Those  who  contra- 
dict are  Eutychians.  Leo  hath  rightly  ex- 
pounded the  faith. 

The  most  magnificent  and  glorious  judges 
said :  Add  then  to  the  definition,  accord- 
ing to  the  judgment  of  our  most  holy  father 
Leo,  that  there  are  two  natures  in  Christ 
united  unchangeably,  inseparably,  uncon- 
fusedly. 

[The  Committee  then  sat  in  the  oratory  of 
the  most  holy  martyr  Euphemis  and  afler- 
tvards  reported  a  definition  of  faith  ivhich 
■while  teaching  the  same  doctrine  ivas  not  the 
Tome  of  Leo  (col.  562).'] 


THE  DEFINITION  OF  FAITH  OF  THE  COUNCIL  OF  CHALCEDON. 


(Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  IV.,  col.  562.) 


The  holy,  great,  and  ecumenical  synod, 
assembled  by  the  grace  of  God  and  the  com- 
mand of  our  most  religious  and  Christian 
Emperors,  Marcian  and  Valentinan,  Au- 
gusti,  at  Chalcedon,  the  metropolis  of  the 
Bithynian  Province,  in  the  martyry  of  the 
holy  and  victorious  martyr  Euphemia,  has 
decreed  as  follows : 

Our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  when 
strengthening  the  knowledge  of  the  Faith 
in  his  disciples,  to  the  end  that  no  one  might 
disagree  with  his  neighbour  concerning  the 
doctrines  of  religion,  and  that  the  proclama- 
tion of  the  truth  might  be  set  forth  equally 
to  all  men,  said,  "  My  peace  I  leave  with 
you,  my  peace  I  give  unto  you."  But,  since 
the  evil  one  does  not  desist  from  sowing 
tares  among  the  seeds  of  godliness,  but  ever 
invents  some  new  device  against  the  truth  ; 
therefore  the  Lord,  providing,  as  he  ever 
does,  for  the  human  race,  has  raised  up 
this  pious,  faithful,  and  zealous  Sovereign, 
and  has  called  together  unto  him  from  all 
parts  the  chief  rulers  of  the  priesthood  ; 
so  that,  the  grace  of  Christ  our  common 
Lord  inspiring  us,  we  may  cast  off  every 
plague  of  falsehood  from  the  sheep  of 
Christ,  and  feed  them  with  the  tender  leaves 
of  truth.  And  this  have  we  done  with  one 
unanimous  consent,  driving  away  erroneous 
doctrines  and  renewing  the  unerring  faith 
of  the  Fathers,  publishing  to  all  men  the 
Creed  of  the  Three  Hundred  and  Eighteen, 
and  to  their  number  adding,  as  their  peers, 
the  Fathers  who  have  received  the  same 
summary  of  religion.  Such  are  the  One 
Hundred  and  Fifty  holy  Fathers  who  after- 
wards assembled  in  the  great  Constantino- 
ple and  ratified  the  same  faith.  Moreover, 
observing  the  order  and  every  form  relating 
to  the  faith,  which  was  observed  by  the  holy 
synod  formerly  held  in  Ephesus,  of  which 
Celestine  of  Rome  and  Cyril  of  Alexandria, 
of  holy  memory,  were  the  leaders,  we  do 
declare  that  the  exposition  of  the  right  and 
blameless  faith  made  by  the  Three  Hundred 
and  Eighteen  holy  and  blessed  Fathers,  as- 
sembled at  Nice  in  the  reign  of  Constantine 
of  pious  memory,  shall  be  pre-eminent :  and 
that  those  things  shall  be  of  force   also, 


NOTES. 

Anatolius  of  Constantinople. 

(Ep.  to  St.  Leo.  Migne,  Pat.  Lett,  Tom. 
LIV.  [Leo.  M.,    Opera,  Tom.  I.]  col.  978.) 

Since  after  judgment  had  been  delivered 
concerning  him,  there  was  need  that  all 
should  agree  in  the  right  faith  (for  which 
purpose  the  most  pious  emperor  had  with  the 
greatest  pains  assembled  the  holy  Synod)  with 
prayer  and  tears,  your  holiness  being  present 
with  us  in  spirit  and  co-operating  with  us 
through  those  most  God-beloved  men  whom 
you  had  sent  to  us,  having  as  our  protector 
the  most  holy  and  most  comely  Martyr 
Euphemia,  we  gave  ourselves  up  entirely  to 
this  salutary  work,  all  other  matters  being  laid 
aside.  And  when  the  crisis  demanded  that 
all  the  most  holy  bishops  gathered  together 
should  set  forth  an  unanimous  definition 
{uvjx^mov  opor)  for  the  explanation  and  clearer 
understanding  of  our  confession  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  our  Lord  God  was  found  ap- 
pearing to  them  that  sought  him  not,  and 
even  to  them  that  asked  not  for  him.  And 
although  some  from  the  beginning  contenti- 
ously  made  opposition,  he  shewed  forth  never- 
theless his  truth  and  so  disposed  things  that 
an  unanimous  and  uncontradicted  writing 
was  published  by  us  all,  which  confirmed 
the  souls  of  the  stable,  and  inviting  to  the 
way  of  truth  all  who  had  declined  therefrom. 
And  when  Ave  had  subscribed  with  unanimous 
consent  the  chart,  we  all  with  one  consent, 
that  is  our  whole  synod,  entered  the  martyry 
of  the  most  holy  and  triumphant  martyr 
Euphemia,  and  when  at  the  prayer  of  our 
most  pious  and  beloved  of  Christ  Einperor 
Marcian,  and  of  our  most  pious  and  in  all 
respects  faithful  Empress,  our  daughter  and 
Augusta  Pulcheria,  with  joy,  and  hilarity  we 
placed  upon  the  holy  altar  the  decision  which 
we  had  written  for  the  confirmation  of  the 
faith  of  our  fathers  in  accordance  with  that 
holy  letter  you  sent  us ;  and  then  handed  it 
to  their  piety,  that  they  might  receive  it  as 
they  had  asked  for  it.  And  when  they  had 
received  it  they  gave  glory  with  us  to  Christ 
the  Lord,  who  had  driven  away  the  darkness 
of  wicked  opinion,  and  had  illustrated  with 
the  greatest  unanimity  the  word  of  truth, 
etc. 


CHALCEDOX.     A.D.  451 


263 


which  were  decreed  by  the  One  Hundred  From  this  passage  can  easily  be  understood 
and  Fifty  holy  Fathers  at  Constantinople, '  the  very  obscure  passage  in  the  letter  of  the 
for  the  uprooting  of  the  heresies  which  had  ,  Council  to  Leo,  where  it  says  that  the  defini- 
then  sprung  up,  and  for  the  confirmation  of  i  tion  was  delivered  by  St.  Euphemia  as  her 
the  same  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Faith  of  own  confession  of   faith.     Vide  note  of  the 


same 
ours. 

The  Creed  of  the  three  hundred  and  eight- 
een Fathers  at  Nice. 

We  believe  in  one  God,  etc. 

Item,  the  Creed  of  the  onehundred  and  fifty 
holy  Fathers  ivho  were  assembled  at  Constan- 
tinople. 

We  believe  in  one  God,  etc. 

This  wise  and  salutary  formula  of  divine 
grace  sufficed  for  the  perfect  knowledge  and 
confirmation  of  religion ;  for  it  teaches  the 
perfect  [doctrine]  concerning  Father,  Son, 
and  Holy  Ghost,  and  sets  forth  the  Incar- 
nation of  the  Lord  to  them  that  faithfully 
receive  it.  But,  forasmuch  as  persons  un- 
dertaking to  make  void  the  preaching  of 
the  truth  have  through  their  individual 
heresies  given  rise  to  empty  babblings ; 
some  of  them  daring  to  corrupt  the  mystery 
of  the  Lord's  incarnation  for  us  and  refus- 
ing [to  use]  the  name  Mother  of  God  (&eo- 
to/co?)  in  reference  to  the  Virgin,  while 
others,  bringing  in  a  confusion  and  mixture, 
and  idly  conceiving  that  the  nature  of  the 
flesh  and  of  the  Godhead  is  all  one,  main- 
taining that  the  divine  Nature  of  the  Only 
Begotten  is,  by  mixture,  capable  of  suffer- 
ing ;  therefore  this  present  holy,  great,  and 
ecumenical  synod,  desiring  to  exclude  every 
device  against  the  Truth,  and  teaching  that 
which  is  unchanged  from  the  beginning,  has 
at  the  very  outset  decreed  that  the  faith  of 
the  Three  Hundred  and  Eighteen  Fathers 
shall  be  preserved  inviolate.  And  on  ac- 
count of  them  that  contend  against  the  Holy 
Ghost,  it  confirms  the  doctrine  afterwards 
delivered  concerning  the  substance  of  the 
Spirit  by  the  One  Hundred  and  Fifty  holy 
Fathers  who  assembled  in  the  imperial  City ; 
which  doctrine  they  declared  unto  all  men, 
not  as  though  they  were  introducing  any- 
thing that  had  been  lacking  in  their  prede- 
cessors, but  in  order  to  explain  through 
written  documents  their  faith  concerning 
the  Holy  Ghost  against  those  who  were 
seeking  to  destroy  his  sovereignty.     And, 


Ballerini  on  this  epistle  of  Anatolius. 


Hefele. 

{Hist  of  the  Councils.  Vol.  III.,  p.  348.) 

The  present   Greek  text  has  Ik  8vo  fao-ewv 
while  the  old  Latin  translation  has,  in  dua- 
bus  naturis.     After  what  had  been  repeatedly 
said  in  this  session  on  the  difference  between 
"  in  two  natures  "  and  "  of  two  natures,"  and 
in  opposition  to  the  latter  formula,  there  can 
be  no  doubt  whatever    that    the    old  Latin 
translator  had  the  more  accurate  text  before 
him,  and  that  it  was  ox'iginally  lv  SJo  <£wrecriv. 
i  This,  however,  is  not  mere  supposition,  but  is 
expressly  testified   by  antiquity :  (1)  by  the 
famous  Abbot  Euthymius  of  Palestine,  a  con- 
temporary of   the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  of 
i  whose    disciples     several    were     present    as 
bishops  at  our  Council  (cf.  Baron,   ad.  ami. 
451,  n.  152  sq.).     We  still  have  a  judgment  of 
his  which  he   gave  respecting  the  decree  of 
Chalcedon  concerning  the  faith,  and  in  which 
!  he  repeats  the  leading  doctrine  in  the  words 
of    the   Synod   itself.      At   our    passage   he 
remarks  :   lv  8vo  (pvcn.cn  yvu>pi£,eoSai  o/MoXoyei  tov 
I  ho.  Xpivrbv  k.  t.  A.     The  fragment  of  his  writ- 
ings on  the  subject  is  found  in  the  Vita  S. 
Euthymii  Abbatis,  written  by  his  pupil  Cyril 
in   the  Analecta    Grceca  of  the  monks  of  St. 
|  Maur,  t.  i.,  p.  57,  printed  in  Mansi,  t.  vii.,  p. 
l  774  sq.      (2)  The   second  ancient  witness  is 
I  Severus,   from  a.d.    513   Monophysite    patri- 
!  arch  of  Antioch,  who  represents  it  as  a  great 
I  reproach  and  an  unpardonable  offence  in  the 
fathers  of  Chalcedon  that  they  had  declared  : 
lv  Suo  (f>v<re(Tiv  dSiaijOe'rois  yviopi^adai  tov  Xpioroi/ 
(see  the  Scntentke  Severi  in  Mansi,  t.  vii.,  p. 
839).      (3)  Somewhat  more   than  a  hundred 
'  years  after  the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  Eva- 
,  grius  copied  its  decree  concerning  the  faith 
!  in  extenso  into  his  Church  History  (lib.  ii.,  4), 
1  and,  in  fact,  with  the  words :  lv  8vo  cpvaeo-iv 
a<rvyxvTu><;  k.  t.  X.  (ed.    Mog.,  p.  294).     (4)  In 
the  conference  on  religion  held  between  the 
Severians  and  the  orthodox  at  Constantino- 
ple,   a.d.    553,    the    former  reproached   the 
Synod  of  Chalcedon  with  having  put  in  dua- 
|  bus  naturis,  instead  of  ex  cluabus  naturis,  as 
Cyril  and  the  old  fathers  had  taught  (Mansi, 
j  t.  viii.,   p.    892;  Hardouin,  t.   ii.,  p.   11G2). 
j  (5)  Leontius  of   Byzantium  maintains  quite 


264 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


on  account  of  those  who  have  taken  in  hand 
to  corrupt  the  mystery  of  the  dispensation 
[i.e.  the  Incarnation]  and  who  shamelessly  | 
pretend  that  he  who  was  born  of  the  holy 
Virgin  Mary  was  a  mere  man,  it  receives  the 
synodical  letters  of  the  Blessed  Cyril,  Pastor 
of  the  Church  of  Alexandria,  addressed  to 
Nestorius  and  the  Easterns,  judging  them 
suitable,  for  the  refutation  of  the  frenzied 
folly  of  Nestorius,  and  for  the  instruction 
of  those  who  long  with  holy  ardour  for  a 
knowledge  of  the  saving  symbol.  And,  for 
the  confirmation  of  the  orthodox  doctrines, : 
it  has  rightly  added  to  these  the  letter  of 
the  President  of  the  great  and  old  Rome, 
the  most  blessed  and  holy  Archbishop  Leo,  j 
which  was  addressed  to  Archbishop  Flavian  [ 
of  blessed  memory,  for  the  removal  of  the 
false  doctrines  of  Eutyches,  judging  them 
to  be  agreeable  to  the  confession  of  the  great 
Peter,  and  as  it  were  a  common  pillar  against 
misbelievers.  For  it  opposes  those  who 
would  rend  the  mystery  of  the  dispensation 
into  a  Dnad  of  Sons  ;  it  repels  from  the 
sacred  assembly  those  who  dare  to  say  that 
the  Godhead  of  the  Only  Begotten  is  capa-  j 
ble  of  suffering ;  it  resists  those  who  imag- 
ine a  mixture  or  confusion  of  the  two  nat- 
ures of  Christ ;  it  drives  away  those  who 
fancy  his  form  of  a  servant  is  of  an  heavenly 
or  some  substance  other  than  that  which 
was  taken  of  us,  and  it  anathematizes  those 
who  foolishly  talk  of  two  natures  of  our 
Lord  before  the  union,  conceiving  that  after 
the  union  there  was  only  one. 

Following  the  holy  Fathers  we  teach  with 
one  voice  that  the  Son  [of  God]  and  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  to  be  confessed  as  one 
and  the  same  [Person],  that  he  is  perfect 
in  Godhead  and  perfect  in  manhood,  very 
God  and  very  man,  of  a  reasonable  soul  and 
[human]  body  consisting,  consubstantial 
with  the  Father  as  touching  his  Godhead, 
and  consubstantial  with  us  as  touching  his 
manhood  ;  made  in  all  things  like  unto  us, 
sin  only  excepted ;  begotten  of  his  Father 
before  the  worlds  according  to  his  Godhead ; 
but  in  these  last  days  for  us  men  and  for 
our  salvation  born  [into  the  world]  of  the 
Virgin  Mary,  the  Mother  of  God  according 
to  his  manhood.  This  one  and  the  same 
Jesus  Christ,  the  only-begotten  Son  [of 
God]  must  be  confessed  to  be  in  two  nat- 
ures,1 unconfusedly,  immutably,  indivisibly, 

1  Vide  parallel  note  from  Hefele. 


distinctly,  in  the  year  610,  in  his  work  Be 
Sectis,  that  the  Synod  taught  ha  Xpiarov  iv 
8vo  cjivaeaiv  acruy^'rcos  k.  it.  \. 

It  is  clear  that  if  any  doubt  had  then  existed 

as  to  the  correct  reading,  Leontius  could  not 

have   opposed   the   Monophysites  with   such 

certainty.      The  passage  adduced  by  him  is 

Actio  iv.,  c.  7.,  in  Galland.     Bibliothcca  PP., 

t.  xii.,  p.  633.     Gieseler  (Kirchengesch.  i.,  S. 

465),    and    after    him    Halm    (Biblioth.    der 

SyniboJc,  S.  118,  note  6),  cites  incorrectly  the 

fourth  instead   of   the   fifth   Actio.     Perhaps 

neither  of  them  had  consulted  the  passage 

itself.     (6)  No  less  weight  is  to  be  attached 

to  the  fact  that  all  the  Latin  translations,  that 

of  Rusticus  and   those  before   him,  have  in 

(hiabus  naturis ;    and   (7)   that    the  Lateran 

[  Synod,  a.d.  649,  had    the    same   reading  in 

their  Acts    (Hardouin,   t.  hi.,   p.   835).     (8) 

Pope    Agatho,    also,    in    his    letter    to    the 

'  Emperor  Constans  II,  which  was  read  in  the 

sixth  Ecumenical  Synod,  adduced  the  creed 

of  Chalcedon  with  the  words  in  duabus  naturis 

I  (in  the  Acts  of  the  sixth  Ecumenical  Council, 

i  Actio  iv.;  in  Mansi,  t.  xi.,  p.  256;  Hardouin, 

t.  hi.,  p.  1091).     In  consequence  of  this,  most 

scholars   of  recent  times,    e.    g.,    Tillemont, 

Walch  (Bibhth.   symbol  veter.,  p.  106),  Hahn 

1  (1.  c),  Gieseler  (La),  Neander  (Abthl.  ii.,  2  of 

■  Bd.  iv.,  S.  988),  have  declared  iv  Svo  cj>vo-eo~iv 

]  to    be    the    original    and    correct    reading. 

;  Neander  adds:     "The  whole  process  of  the 

transactions  of  the  Council  shows  this  (that 

j  iv  Svo  is  the  correct  reading).     Evidently  the 

earlier  creed,  which  was  more  favourable  to 

the  Egyptian  doctrine,  contained  the  e«  Svo 

I  c£wrew  and  the  favour  shown   to   the   other 

party  came  out  chiefly  in  the  change  of  the 

ii<   into    iv.      The   expression    ex   Svo   4>vo-ewv 

besides,    does    not    fit   the    place,    the   verb 

yvwpL^ofievov  points  rather  to  the  original  iv. 

The   iv   Svo   <pvcreo-iv   or   ex   Sl'o  cjyvaewv  was   the 

turning  -  point    of    the    whole     controversy 

between  Monophysitism  and  Dyophysitism." 

Cf.,  on  the  other  side,  Baur,    Trinitatslehre, 

Bd.    i.,    S.    820,    and    Dorner    (Lchre   v.    der 

Person   Christi,  Thl.  ii.,  S.  129),  where  it  is 

maintained  that  «'x  is  the  correct  and  original 

!  reading,  but  that  it  was  from  the  beginning 

:  purposely  altered  by  the  Westerns  into  in  ; 

moreover,   that   ex  fits   better  than   iv  with 

'  yvoipito/xevov,  and  therefore  that  it  had  been 

j  allowed  as  a  concession  to  the  Monophysites. 

!  The  meaning,  moreover,  they  say,  of  ex  and  iv 

is  essentially  the  same,  and  the  one  and  the 

other  alike  excluded  Monophysitism. 


CIIALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


265 


inseparably  [united],  and  that  without  the 
distinction  of  natures  being  taken  away  by 
such  union,  but  rather  the  peculiar  property 
of  each  nature  being  preserved  and  being 
united  in  one  Person  and  subsistence,  not 
separated  or  divided  into  two  persons,  but 
one  and  the  same  Son  and  only-begotten, 
God  the  Word,  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  as 
the  Prophets  of  old  time  have  spoken  con- 
cerning him,  and  as  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
hath  taught  us,  and  as  the  Creed  of  the 
Fathers  hath  delivered  to  us. 

These  things,  therefore,  having  been  ex- 
pressed by  us  with  the  greatest  accuracy 
and  attention,  the  holy  Ecumenical  Synod 
defines  that  no  one  shall  be  suffered  to  bring 
forward  a  different  faith  (eripav  ttlo-tiv),  nor 
to  write,  nor  to  put  together,  nor  to  excog- 
itate, nor  to  teach  it  to  others.     But  such 


as  dare  either  to  put  together  another  faith, 
or  to  bring  forward  or  to  teach  or  to  deliver 
a  different  Creed  (erepov  avfjufioXov)  to  such 
as  Avish  to  be  converted  to  the  knowledge 
of  the  truth  from  the  Gentiles,  or  Jews  or 
any  heresy  whatever,  if  they  be  Bishops  or 
clerics  let  them  be  deposed,  the  Bishops 
from  the  Episcopate,  and  the  clerics  from 
the  clergy  ;  but  if  they  be  monks  or  laics  : 
let  them  be  anathematized. 

After  the  reading  of  the  definition,  all  the 
most  religious  Bishops  cried  out:  This  is 
the  faith  of  the  fathers :  let  the  metro- 
politans forthwith  subscribe  it :  let  them 
forthwith,  in  the  presence  of  the  judges, 
subscribe  it :  let  that  which  has  been  well 
defined  have  no  delay :  this  is  the  faith  of 
the  Apostles :  by  this  we  all  stand :  thus 
we  all  believe. 


EXTRACTS  FROM  THE  ACTS. 


SESSION  VI. 


(Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  IV.,  col.  611.) 


[The  Emperor  ivas  present  in  $>erson  and 
addressed  the  Council  and  aftenvards  sug- 
gested legislation  tmder  three  heads,  the 
drafts  for  ivhich  were  read.] 

After  this  reading,  the  capitulas  were 
handed  by  our  most  sacred  and  pious  prince 
to  the  most  beloved  of  God  Anatolius,  arch- 
bishop of  royal  Constantinople,  which  is 
New  Borne,  and  all  the  most  God-beloved 
bishops  cried  out :  Many  years  to  our  Em- 
peror and  Empress,  the  pious,  the  Chris- 
tian. May  Christ  whom  thou  servest  keep 
thee.  These  things  are  worthy  of  the  faith. 
To  the  Priest,  the  Emperor.  Thou  hast 
straightened  out  the  churches,  victor  of 
thine  enemies,  teacher  of  the  faith.     Many 


years  to  the  pious  Empress,  the  lover  of 
Christ.  Many  years  to  her  that  is  ortho- 
dox. May  God  save  your  kingdom.  Ye 
have  put  down  the  heretics,  ye  have  kept 
the  faith.  May  hatred  be  far  removed  from 
your  empire,  and  may  your  kingdom  endure 
for  ever ! 

Our  most  sacred  and  pious  prince  said 
to  the  holy  synod :  To  the  honour  of  the 
holy  martyr  Euphemia,  and  of  your  holi- 
ness, Ave  decree  that  the  city  of  Chalcedon, 
in  Avhich  the  synod  of  the  holy  faith  has 
been  held,  shall  have  the  honours  of  a  me- 
tropolis, in  name  only  giving  it  this  honour, 
the  proper  dignity  of  the  city  of  Nicomedia 
being  preserved. 

All  cried  out,  etc.,  etc. 


DECREE  ON  THE  JURISDICTION  OF  JERUSALEM  AND 

ANTIOCH. 


SESSION  VII. 

(Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Torn.  IV.,  col.  618.) 

NOTE. 


The  most  magnificent  and  glorious  judges 
said :  .  .  .  The  arrangement  arrived 
at  through  the  agreement  of  the  most  holy 
Maximus,  the  bishop  of  the  city  of  Antioch, 
and  of  the  most  holy  Juvenal,  the  bishop 
of  Jerusalem,  as  the  attestation  of  each  of 
them  declares,  shall  remain  firm  for  ever, 
through  our  decree  and  the  sentence  of  the 
holy  synod;  to  wit,    that   the   most   holy 


The  Ballerini,  in  their  notes  to  the  Works 
of  St.  Leo  (Migue,  Pat.  Lat.,  LV.,  col.  733  et 
seqq.),  cite  fragments  of  the  Acts  of  this  coun- 
cil, which  if  they  can  be  trusted,  shew  that 
this  matter  of  the  rights  of  Antioch  and  Jeru- 
salem was  treated  of  again  at  a  subsequent 
session  (on  Oct.  31)  and  determined  in  the 
same  fashion. 


These  fragments  have  general- 
bishop  Maximus  or  rather  the  most  holy  L    been  receiyed  as        £       and  ^  been 

church  of  Antioch,  shall  have  under  its  own  inserted  b    Mansi  (Tom   ^L,  722  C.)  in  his 
jurisdiction  the  two  Phcenicias  and  Arabia ; 
but  the  most  holy  Juvenal,  bishop  of  Je- 
rusalem, or  rather  the   most  holy  Church 


which  is  under  him,  shall  have  under  his 
own  power  the  three  Palestines,  all  im- 
perial pragmatics  and  letters  and  penalties 
being  done  away  according  to  the  bidding 
of  our  most  sacred  and  pious  prince. 


Vll., 

Concilia. 

The  notes  of  the  Ballerini  may  also  be  read 
with  profit,  in  the  same  volume  of  Migne'a 
Latin  Patrology,  col.  737  ct  seq. 


THE  DECREE  WITH  REGARD  TO  THE  BISHOP  OF  EPHESUS. 

SESSION  XII. 


(Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  IV.,  col.  706.) 


The  most  glorious  judges  said  :  Since  the 
proposition  of  the  God-beloved  archbishop 
of  royal  Constantinople,  Auatolius,  and  of 
the  most  reverend  bishop  Paschasinus,  hold- 
ing the  place  of  Leo,  the  most  God-beloved 
archbishop  of  old  Home,  which  orders  that 
because  both  of  them  [i.e.,  Bassianus  and 
Stephen]  acted  uncanonically,  neither  of 
them  should  rule,  nor  be  called  bishop  of  the 
most  holy  church  of  Ephesus,  and  since  the 
whole  holy  s}rnod  taught  that  uncanonically 
they  had  performed  these  ordinations,  and 
had  agreed  with  the  speeches  of  the  most 
reverend  bishops  ;  the  most  reverend  Bas- 
sianus and  the  most  reverend  Stephen  will 
be  removed  from  the  holy  church  of  Ephe- 
sus ;  but  they  shall  enjoy  the  episcopal 
dignity,  and  from  the  revenues  of  the  be- 
fore-mentioned most  holy  church,  for  their 


nourishment  and  consolation,  they  shall  re- 
ceive each  year  two  hundred  gold  pieces ; 
and  another  bishop  shall  be  ordained  ac- 
cording to  the  canons  for  the  most  holy 
church.1 

And  the  whole  holy  synod  cried  out : 
This  is  a  just  sentence.  This  is  a  pious 
scheme.    These  things  are  fair  to  look  upon. 

The  most  reverend  bishop  Bassianus  said: 
Pray  give  order  that  what  was  stolen  from 
me  be  restored. 

The  most  glorious  judges  said :  If  any- 
thing belonging  to  the  most  reverend  bishop 
Bassianus  personally  has  been  taken  from 
him,  either  by  the  most  reverend  bishop 
Stephen,  or  by  any  other  persons  whatso- 
ever, this  shall  be  restored,  after  judicial 
proof,  by  them  who  took  it  away  or  caused 
it  to  be  taken. 


1  The  English  translation  of  nefele  asserts  twice  (Hist,  of  the  I  posed."    This  is  entirely  a  mistake,  he  was  deprived  of  his  dio- 
Councils,  Vol.  Ill ,  pp.  173  and  37G),  that  Bassianus  was  ."  de-  |  cese,  but  retained  his  episcopal  rank. 


DECREE  WITH   REGARD  TO  NICOMEDIA. 


SESSION  XIII. 


(Labbe  and  Cossarfc,  Concilia,  Tom.  IV.,  col.  715.) 


The  most  glorious  judges  said  [after  the 
reading  of  the  imperial  letters  was  finished] : 
These  divine  letters  say  nothing  whatever 
with  regard  to  the  episcopate,  but  both  re- 
fer to  honour  belonging  to  metropolitan 
cities.  But  the  sacred  letters  of  Valentinian 
and  Valens  of  divine  memory,  which  then 
bestowed  metropolitan  rights  upon  the  city 
of  Nice,  carefully  provided  that  nothing 
should  be  taken  away  from  other  cities. 
And  the  canon  of  the  holy  fathers  decreed 
that  there  should  be  one  metropolis  in  each 
province.  What  therefore  is  the  pleasure 
of  the  holy  synod  in  this  matter  ? 

The  holy  synod  cried  out :  Let  the  canons 
be  kept.     Let  the  canons  be  sufficient. 

Atticus  the  most  reverend  bishop  of  old 
Nicopolis  in  Epirus  said  :  The  canon  thus 
defines,  that  a  metropolitan  should  have 
jurisdiction  in  each  province,  and  he  should 
constitute  all  the  bishops  Avho  are  in  that 
province.  And  this  is  the  meaning  of  the 
canon.  Now  the  bishop  of  Nicomedia,  since 
from  the  beginning  this  was  a  metropolis, 
ought  to  ordain  all  the  bishops  Avho  are  in 
that  province. 

The  holy  synod  said  :  This  is  what  Ave  all 
Avish,  this  we  all  pray  for,  let  this  every- 
AA'here  be  observed,  this  is  pleasing  to  all  of 
us. 


John,  Constantine,  Patrick  [Peter]  and 
the  rest  of  the  most  reverend  bishops  of  the 
Pontic  diocese  [through  John  Avho  Avas  one 
of  them]  said :  The  canons  recognize  the 
one  more  ancient  as  the  metropolitan.  And 
it  is  manifest  that  the  most  religious  bish- 
op of  Nicomedia  has  the  right  of  the  or- 
dination, and  since  the  laAvs  (as  your  mag- 
nificence has  seen)  have  honoured  Nice  with 
the  name  only  of  metropolis,  and  so  made  its 
bishop  superior  to  the  rest  of  the  bishops 
of  the  province  in  honour  only. 

The  holy  synod  said  :  They  have  taught 
in  accordance  with  the  canons,  beautifully 
have  they  taught.     We  all  say  the  same 


things. 

[Aetius,  Archdeacon  of  Constantinople,  then 
put  in  a  plea  to  save  the  rights  of  the  throne 
of  the  royal  city.'] 

The  most  glorious  judges  said :  The  most 
reA7erend  the  bishop  of  Nicomedia  shall 
have  the  authority  of  metropolitan  over  the 
churches  of  the  province  of  Bithynia,  and 
Nice  shall  have  the  honour  only  of  Metro- 
political  rank,  submitting  itself  according 
to  the  example  of  the  other  bishops  of  the 
province  of  Nicomedia.  For  such  is  the 
pleasure  of  the  Holy  Synod. 


THE  XXX  CANONS  OF  THE  HOLY  AND  FOURTH  SYNODS, 

OF  CHALCEDON. 

CANON  I. 

We  have  judged  it  right  that  the  canons  of  the  Holy  Fathers  made  in  every  synod 
even  until  uoav,  should  remain  in  force. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  I. 


The  canons  of  every  Synod  of  the  holy  Fathers 
shall  be  observed. 

Hefele. 

Before  the  holding  of  the  Council  of  Chal- 
cedon,  in  the  Greek  Church,   the  canons  of 


several  synods,  which  were  held  previously, 
Avere  gathered  into  one  collection  and  pro- 
vided with  continuous  numbers,  and  such  a 
collection  of  canons,  as  we  have  seen,  lay  be- 
fore the  Synod  of  Chalcedon.  As,  however, 
most  of  the  synods  whose  canons  Avere  re- 
ceived into  the  collection,  e.g.  those  of  Neo- 


268 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


csesarea,  Ancyra,  Gangra,  Antioch,  were  cer- 
tainly not  Ecumenical  Councils,  and  were 
even  to  some  extent  of  doubtful  authority, 
such  as  the  Antiochene  Synod  of  341,  the  con- 
firmation of  the  Ecumenical  Synod  was  now 
given  to  them,  in  order  to  raise  them  to 
the  position  of  universally  and  uncondi- 
tionally valid  ecclesiastical  rules.  It  is  admi- 
rably remarked  by  the  Emperor  Justinian, 
in  his  131st  Novel,  cap.j.;  "We  honour  the 
doctrinal  decrees  of  the  first  four   Councils 


as   we   do   Holy   Scripture,  but   the   canons 
given  or  approved  by  them  as  we  do  the  laws." 

It  seems  quite  impossible  to  determine  just 
what  councils  are  included  in  this  list,  the 
Council  in  Trallo  has  entirely  removed  this 
ambiguity  in  its  second  canon. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decrelum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 
XXV.,  Qusest.  1,  can.  xiv. 


CANON  II. 

If  any  Bishop  should  ordain  for  money,  and  put  to  sale  a  grace  which  cannot  be 
sold,  and  for  money  ordain  a  bishop,  or  chorepiscopus,  or  presbyters,  or  deacons,  or  any 
other  of  those  who  are  counted  among  the  clergy ;  or  if  through  lust  of  gain  he  should 
nominate  for  money  a  steward,  or  advocate,  or  prosmonarius,  or  any  one  whatever  who 
is  on  the  roll  of  the  Church,  let  him  who  is  convicted  of  this  forfeit  his  own  rank ;  and 
let  him  who  is  ordained  be  nothing  profited  by  the  purchased  ordination  or  promotion  ; 
but  let  him  be  removed  from  the  dignity  or  charge  he  has  obtained  for  money.  And  if 
any  one  should  be  found  negotiating  such  shameful  and  unlawful  transactions,  let  him 
also,  if  he  is  a  clergyman,  be  deposed  from  his  rank,  and  if  he  is  a  layman  or  monk,  let 
him  be  anathematized. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XIX. 

Whoso  buys  or  sells  an  ordination,  down  to  a 
Prosmonarius,  shall  be  in  danger  of  losing  his 
grade.  Such  shall  edso  be  the  case  with  go-be- 
tweens, if  they  be  clerics  they  shall  be  cut  off  from 
their  rank,  if  laymen  or  monks,  they  shall  be 
anathematized. 

Bright. 

A  great  scandal  in  the  "  Asian  diocese  "  had 
led  to  St.  Chrysostom's  intervention.  Anto- 
ninus, bishop  of  Ephesus,  was  charged,  with 
"  making  it  a  rule  to  sell  ordinations  of  bishops 
at  rates  proportionate  to  the  value  of  their 
sees  "  (Palladius,  Dial,  de  vita  Chrysost,^.  50). 
Chrysostom  held  a  synod  at  Ephesus,  at  which 
six  bishops  were  deposed  for  having  obtained 
their  sees  in  this  manner.  Isidore  of  Pelasium 
repeatedly  remonstrated  with  his  bishop  Euse- 
bius  on  the  heinousness  of  "  selling  the  gift  " 
of  ordinations  {Epist,  I.,  26,  30,  37)  ;  and 
names  Zosimus,  a  priest,  and  Maron,  a  deacon, 
as  thus  ordained  (il>.  Ill,  119).  A  few  years 
before  the  council,  a  court  of  three  bishops 
sat  at  Berytus  to  hear  charges  brought 
against  Ibas,  bishop  of  Edessa,  by  clerics  of 
his  diocese.  The  third  charge  was  thus  curtly 
worded  :  "Moreover  he  receives  for  laying  on 
hands  "  (Mansi,  vii.  224).  The  xxvijth  Trul- 
lan  canon  repeated  this  canon  of  Chalcedon 
against  persons  ordained  for  money,  doubt- 
less  in   view  of  such   a   state   of   things  as 


Gregory  the  Great  had  heard  of  nearly  a  cen- 
tury earlier,  "that  in  the  Eastern  Churches 
no  one  comes  to  holy  order  except  by  the  pay- 
ment of  premiums "  (Ejiist.  xi.  46,  to  the 
bishop  of  Jerusalem  ;  compare  Evagrius's  as- 
sertion that  Justin  II.  openly  sold  bishoprics, 
V.  1).  It  is  easy  to  understand  how  the  scru- 
ples of  ecclesiastics  could  be  abated  by  the 
courtly  fashion  of  calling  bribes  "  eulogiae  " 
(Fleury,  XXVI,  20),  just  as  the  six  prelates 
above  referred  to  had  regarded  their  payments 
as  an  equivalent  for  that  "  making  over  of 
property  to  the  Curia,"  which  was  required 
by  a  law  of  399  (Cod.  Theod.,  xii.  1,  163,  see 
notes  in  Transl.  of  Fleury,  i.  163,  ij.  16). 

The  IkSikos,  "defensor,"  was  an  official  Ad- 
vocate or  counsel  for  the  Church.  The  legal 
force  of  the  term  "defensor"  is  indicated  by 
a  law  of  Valentinian  I.  "Nee  idem  in  eodem 
negotio  defensor  sit  et  quaesitor"  (Cod. 
Theod.,  ii.  10,  2).  In  the  East  the  office  was 
held  by  ecclesiastics ;  thus,  John,  presbyter  and 
"  advocate  "  was  employed,  at  the  Council  of 
Constantinople  in  448,  to  summon  Eutyches 
(Mansi,  vii.  697).  About  496,  Paul  the  "Ad- 
vocate "  of  Constantinople  saved  his  arch- 
bishop from  the  sword  of  a  murderer  at  the 
cost  of  his  own  life  (Theodor.,  Lect.  ii.  11). 
In  the  list  of  the  functionaries  of  St.  Sophia, 
given  by  Goar  in  his  Euchologion  (p.  270), 
the  Protecdicos  is  discribed  as  adjudicating, 
with  twelve  assessors,  in  smaller  causes,  on 


OHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


2G9 


which  he  afterwards  reports  to  the  bishop. 
In  Africa,  on  the  other  hand,  from  a.  d.  407 
(see  Cod.  Theod.,  xvi.  2, 38),  the  office  was  held 
by  barristers,  in  accordance  with  a  request  of 
the  African  bishops  (Cod.  Afric,  97  ;  Mansi, 
iii.,  802),  who,  six  years  earlier,  had  asked  for 
"  defensores,"  with  special  reference  to  the 
oppression  of  the  poor  by  the  rich  (Cod.  Afric, 
75  ;  Mansi,  iii.  778,  970).  The  "  defensores  " 
mentioned  by  Gregory  the  Great  had  prima- 
rily to  take  care  of  the  poor  (Epist.,  v.  29),  and 
of  the  church  property  (ib.,  i.  36),  but  also  to 
be  advocates  of  injured  clerics  (ib.,  ix.  64)  and 
act  as  assessors  (ib.,  x.  1),  etc. 

The  next  office  is  that  of  the  Prosmonarius 
or,  according  to  a  various  reading  adopted  by 
many  (e.g.  Justellus,  Hervetus,  Beveridge, 
Bingham),  theParamonarius.  Opinions  differ 
as  to  the  functions  intended.  Isidore  gives 
simply  "  paramonarius  :  "  Dionysius  (see  Jus- 
tellus, Biblioth.,i.,  134)  omits  the  word ;  but  in 
the  "  interpretatio  Dionysii,"  as  given  in  the 
Concilia,  freedom  has  been  taken  to  insert 
"  vel  mansionarium "  in  a  parenthesis  (vii. 
373  ;  see  Beveridge,  in  loc).  Mansionarius  is  a 
literal  rendering ;  but  what  was  the  function 
of  a  mansionarius  ?  In  Gregory  the  Great's 
time  he  was  a  sacristan  who  had  the  duty  of 
lighting  the  church  (Dial.,  i.  5)  ;  and  "  ostia- 
rium"  in  the  Prisca  implies  the  same  idea. 
Tillemont,  without  deciding  between  the  two 
Greek  readings,  thinks  that  the  person  in- 
tended had  "  some  charge  of  what  pertained  I 


to  the  church  itself,  perhaps  like  our  present 
bedells"  (xv.  694).  So  Fleury  renders,  "  con- 
cierge "  (xxviij.  29) ;  and  Newman,  reading 
"  paramonarion,"  takes  a  like  view  (note  in 
Transl.  of  Fleury,  vol.  iii.,  p.  392).  But  Jus- 
tellus (i.  91)  derives  "paramonarius"  from 
[xovrj  "  mansio,"  a  halting-place,  so  that  the 
sense  would  be  a  manager  of  one  of  the 
church's  farms,  a  "  villicus,"  or,  as  Bingham 
expresses  it,  "  a  bailiff"  (iii.  3,  1).  Beveridge 
agrees  with  Justellus,  except  in  giving  to 
ixom'i  the  sense  of  "  monastery  "  (compare  the 
use  of  ixovy)  in  Athan.,  Apol.  c.  Avion,  67,  where 
Valesius  understands  it  as  "  a  station  "  on  a 
road,  but  others  as  "  a  monastery,"  see  Histo- 
rical Writings  of  St.  Athanasius,  Introd.,  p. 
xliv.).  Bingham  also  j>refers  this  interpreta- 
tion. Suicer  takes  it  as  required  by  "para- 
monarios  "  which  he  treats  as  the  true  read- 
ing: "  prosmonarios "  he  thinks  would  have 
the  sense  of  "  sacristan." 

Hkfele. 

According  to  Van  Espen,  however,  who 
here  supports  himself  upon  Du  Cange,  by 
"prosmonarios"  or  "mansionarius,"  in  the 
same  way  as  by  "  oiconomos,"  a  steward  of 
church  property  was  to  be  understood. 

The  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 
I.,  Qusest.  i.,  can.  viij. 


CANON  III. 

It  has  come  to  [the  knowledge  of]  the  holy  Synod  that  certain  of  those  who  are 
enrolled  among  the  clergy  have,  through  lust  of  gain,  become  hirers  of  other  men's  pos- 
sessions, and  make  contracts  pertaining  to  secular  affairs,  lightly  esteeming  the  service 
of  God,  and  slip  into  the  houses  of  secular  persons,  whose  property  the}r  undertake 
through  covetousness  to  manage.  Wherefore  the  great  and  holy  Synod  decrees  that 
henceforth  no  bishop,  clergyman,  nor  monk  shall  hire  possessions,  or  engage  in  busi- 
ness, or  occupy  himself  in  worldly  engagements,  unless  he  shall  be  called  by  the  law  to 
the  guardianship  of  minors,  from  which  there  is  no  escape ;  or  unless  the  bishop  of 
the  city  shall  commit  to  him  the  care  of  ecclesiastical  business,  or  of  unprovided 
orphans  or  widows  and  of  persons  Avho  stand  especially  in  need  of  the  Church's  help, 
through  the  fear  of  God.  And  if  any  one  shall  hereafter  transgress  these  decrees,  he 
shall  be  subjected  to  ecclesiastical  penalties. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  III. 


TJiose  who  assume  the  care  of  secular  houses 
should  be  corrected,  unless  perchance  the  law 
called  them  to  the  administration  of  those  not  yet 
come  of  age,  from  ivhich  there  is  no  exemption. 
Unless  further  their  Bishop  permits  them  to  take 
care  of  orphans  and  ividows. 


Bright. 


These  two  cases  excepted,  the  undertaking 
of  secular  business  was  made  ecclesiastically 
penal.  Yet  this  is  not  to  be  construed  as 
forbidding  clerics  to  work  at  trades  either  (1) 
when  the  church-funds  were  insufficient  to 
maintain  them,  or  (2)  in  order  to  have  more 


270 


CHALCEDON.    A.D.  451 


to  bestow  in  alms,  or  (3)  as  an  example  of 
industry  or  humility.  Thus,  most  of  the 
clergy  of  Csesarea  in  Cappadocia  practised 
sedentary  trades  for  a  livelihood  (Basil,  Epist., 
cxcviii.,  1) ;  and  some  African  canons  allow, 
or  even  direct,  a  cleric  to  live  by  a  trade,  pro- 
vided that  his  clerical  duties  are  not  neglected 
(Mansi,  iii.,  955).  At  an  earlier  time  Spyrid- 
ion,  the  famous  Cypriot  bishop,  still  one  of 
the  most  popular  saints  in  the  Levant  (Stan- 
ley's East,  Church,  p.  126),  retained,  out  of 
humility  (arvfyiav  ttoWyjv,  Soc,  i.  12),  his  occu- 
pation as  a  shepherd  ;  and  in  the  latter  part 
of  the  fourth  century  Zeno,  bishop  of  Maiuma, 
wove  linen,  partly  to  supply  his  own  wants, 
and  partly  to  obtain  means  of  helping  the 
poor  (Soz.,  vii.  28).  Sidonius  mentions  a 
"reader"  who   maintained  himself   by  com- 


mercial transactions  (Epist,  vi.  8),  and  in  the 
Anglo-Saxon  Church,  although  presbyters 
were  forbidden  to  become  "negotiorum 
sreculariuni  dispositores  "  (CI.  of  Clovesho  in 
747,  c.  8),  or  to  be  "  mongers  and  covetous 
merchants "  (Elfric's  canons,  xxx.),  yet  the 
canons  of  King  Edgar's  reign  ordered  every 
priest  "diligently  to  learn  a  handicraft "  (No. 
11 ;  Wilkins,  i.  225).  In  short,  it  was  not  the 
mere  fact  of  secular  employment,  but  secu- 
larly of  motive  and  of  tone  that  was  con- 
demned. 

This  canon  was  the  second  of  these  pro- 
posed by  the  Emperor,  and  is  found  in  the 
Corpus  Juris  Canonic/,  Gratian's  Decretum, 
Pars  I,,  I)ist,  lxxxvi,,  C.  xxvj. 


CANON  IT. 

Let  those  who  truly  and  sincerely  lead  the  monastic  life  be  counted  worthy  of 
becoming  honour ;  but,  forasmuch  as  certain  persons  using  the  pretext  of  monasticism 
bring  confusion  both  upon  the  churches  and  into  political  affairs  by  going  about  pro- 
miscuously in  the  cities,  and  at  the  same  time  seeking  to  establish  Monasteries  for  them- 
selves; it  is  decreed  that  no  one  anywhere  build  or  found  a  monastery  or  oratory  con- 
trary to  the  will  of  the  bishop  of  the  city ;  and  that  the  monks  in  every  city  and  district 
shall  be  subject  to  the  bishop,  and  embrace  a  quiet  course  of  life,  and  give  themselves 
only  to  fasting  and  prayer,  remaining  permanently  in  the  places  in  which  they  were  set 
apart ;  and  they  shall  meddle  neither  in  ecclesiastical  nor  in  secular  affairs,  nor  leave 
their  own  monasteries  to  take  part  in  such ;  unless,  indeed,  they  should  at  any  time 
through  urgent  necessity  be  appointed  thereto  by  the  bishop  of  the  city.  And  no  slave 
shall  be  received  into  any  monastery  to  become  a  monk  against  the  will  of  his  master. 
And  if  any  one  shall  transgress  this  our  judgment,  we  have  decreed  that  he  shall  be 
excommunicated,  that  the  name  of  God  be  not  blasphemed.  But  the  bishop  of  the  city 
must  make  the  needful  provision  for  the  monasteries. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  IV. 


Domestic  oratories  and  monasteries  are  not. 
to  be  erected  contrary  to  the  judgment  of  the 
bishop.  Every  monk  must  be  subject  to  his 
bishop,  and  must  not  leave  his  house  except  at 
his  suggestion.  A  slave,  however,  can  not  enter 
the  monastic  life  ivithout  the  consent  of  his 
master. 

Hefele. 

Like  the  previous  canon,  this  one  was 
brought  forward  by  the  Emperor  Marcian  in 
the  sixth  session,  and  then  as  number  one, 
and  the  synod  accepted  the  Emperor's  pro- 
posed canon  almost  verbally.  Occasion  for 
this  canon  seems  to  have  been  given  by  monks 
of  Eutychian  tendencies,  and  especially  by 
the  Syrian  Bai'sumas,  as  appears  from  the 
fourth  session.     He  and  his  monks  had,  as 


Eutychians,  withdrawn  themselves  from  the 
jurisdiction  of  their  bishops,  whom  they  sus- 
pected of  Nestorianism. 

Bright. 

Here  observe  (1)  the  definite  assertion  of 
episcopal  authority  over  monks,  as  it  is  re- 
peated for  greater  clearness  in  the  last  words 
of  the  canon,  which  are  not  found  in  Mar- 
dan's  draft,  "It  is  the  duty  of  the  bishop  of 
the  city  to  make  due  provision  for  the  monas- 
teries," and  compare  canons  8,  24.  Isidore 
says  that  the  bishop  must  "keep  an  eye  on 
the  negligences  of  monks"  (Epist.,  i.  149). 
The  Western  Church  followed  in  this  track 
(see  Council  of  Agde,  canon  xxvii.,  that  "no 
new  monastery  is  to  be  founded  without  the 
bishop's  approval,"  and  1st  of  Orleans,  can- 
on xix.,   "Let  abbots  be  under  the  bishop's 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


271 


power,"  and  also  Vtli  of  Paris,  canon  xij., 
Mansi,  viii.,  329,  354,  542,  etc.),  until  a  re- 
action set  in  against  the  oppressiveness  of 
bishops,  was  encouraged  by  Gregory  the 
Great  (Epist.,  i.  12 ;  ii.  41),  the  IVth  Council  of 
Toledo  (canon  1L),  and  the  English  Council  of 
Hertford  (canon  iij.,  Bede,  iv.  5,  and  Bright's 
Chapters  of  Early  Engl.  Ch.  Hist.,  p.  244),  and 
culminated  in  the  system  of  monastic  exemp- 
tions, of  which  Monte  Cassino,  St.  Martin's  of 
Tours,  Fulda,  Westminster,  Battle  (see  Free- 
man, Norm.  Conquest,  iv.  409),  and  St  Alban's 
were  eminent  instances. 

This  canon,  cut  up  and  mutilated,  is  found 


in  the  Corpus  Juris  Canonici,  Gratian's  Decre- 
tum,  Pars  II.,  Causa  XVI.,  Quest.  I.,  can.  xij., 
and  Causa  XVIII.,  Quest.  II.,  Canon  X. 

I  have  followed  the  reading  of  the  Prisca, 
and  of  Dionysius,  of  Kouth,  and  of  Balsamon, 
"  they  were  set  apart,"  i.e.  (as  Balsamon 
explains)  where  they  received  the  monastic 
tonsure.  This  reading  substitutes  atma^avTo 
for  eireTa£avTo,  which  would  mean  "  over 
which  they  had  been  put  in  authority,"  or 
possibly  (as  Johnson)  "where  they  are  ap- 
pointed," or  as  Hammond,  "in  which  they 
have  been  settled."  Isidore  reads  "  ordinati 
sunt" 


CANON  V. 

Conceening  bishops  or  clergymen  who  go  about  from  city  to  city,  it  is  decreed  that 
the  canons  enacted  by  the  Holy  Fathers  shall  still  retain  their  force. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  V. 


Those  who  go  from  city  to  city  shall  be  subject 
to  the  canon  law  on  the  subject. 

Clerical  adventurers  and  brief  pastorates 
are  not  the  peculiar  characteristics  of  any  one 
century. 

Bright. 

It  is  supposed  by  Hefele  that  the  bishops 
were  thinking  of  the  case  of  Bassian,  who,  in 
the  eleventh  session  (Oct.  29),  pleaded  that 
he  had  been  violently  ejected  from  the  see  of 
Ephesus.  Stephen,  the  actual  bishop,  an- 
swered that  Bassian  had  not  been  "  ordained  " 


for  that  see,  but  had  invaded  it  and  been  justly 
expelled.  Bassian  rejoined  that  his  original 
consecration  for  the  see  of  Evasa  had  been 
forcible  even  to  brutality  ;  that  he  had  never 
even  visited  Evasa,  that  therefore  his  appoint- 
ment to  Ephesus  was  not  a  translation.  Ul- 
timately, the  Council  cut  the  knot  by  order- 
ing that  a  new  bishop  should  be  elected, 
Bassian  and  Stephen  retaining  the  episcopal 
title  and  receiving  allowances  from  the  rev- 
enues of  the  see  (Mansi,  vii.  273  et  seqq.) 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Dccretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 
VII.,  Queest.  I.,  can.  xxij.1 


CANON  VI. 

Neitheb  presbyter,  deacon,  nor  any  of  the  ecclesiastical  order  shall  be  ordained  at 
large,  nor  unless  the  person  ordained  is  particularly  appointed  to  a  church  in  a  city  or 
village,  or  to  a  marfcyry,  or  to  a  monastery.  And  if  any  have  been  ordained  without 
a  charge,  the  holy  Synod  decrees,  to  the  reproach  of  the  ordainer,  that  such  an  ordina- 
tion shall  be  inoperative,  and  that  such  shall  nowhere  be  suffered  to  officiate. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VI. 


In  Martyries  and  Monasteries  ordinations  are 
strictly  forbidden.  Should  any  one  be  ordained 
therein,  his  ordination  shall  be  reputed  of  no  ef- 
fect. 

Van  Espen. 

The  wording  of  the  canon  seems  to  intimate 


that  the  synod  of  Chalcedon  held  ordinations 

of  this  sort  to  be  not  only  illicit  but  also  invalid, 
!  irritis  and  cassis.  Nor  is  this  to  be  wondered 
t  at,  if  we  take  into  account  the  pristine  and 
;  ancient   discipline    of    the    church   and   the 

opinion  of  many  of  the  Scholastics  (Morinus, 
\De  88.  Ordinat.,  Parte  III,  Exercit.  V.,  cap 

ix.). 


1  Not  given  in  Hefele,  and  incorrectly  printed  in  Van  Espen  as  Causa  XII.  instead  of  VII. 


272 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


Hefele. 

It  is  clear  that  our  canon  forbids  the  so- 
called  absolute  ordinations,  and  requires  that 
every  cleric  must  at  the  time  of  his  ordination 
be  designated  to  a  definite  church.  The  only 
titulus  which  is  here  recognized  is  that  which 
was  later  known  as  titulus  bencficii.  As  vari- 
ous kinds  of  this  title  we  find  here  (a)  the 
appointment  to  a  church  in  the  city  ;  (b)  to  a 
village  church  ;  (c)  that  to  the  chapel  of  a 
martyr  ;  (d)  the  appointment  as  chaplain  of  a 
monastery.  For  the  right  understanding  of 
the  last  point,  it  must  be  remembered  that 
the  earliest  monks  were  in  no  wise  clerics,  but 
that  soon  the  custom  was  introduced  in  every 
larger  convent,  of  having  at  least  one  monk 
ordained  presbyter,  that  he  might  provide  for 
divine  service  in  the  monastery. 

Similar  prohibitions  of  ordinationcs  absolutce 
were  also  put  forth  in  after  times. 

According  to  existing  law,  absolute  ordina- 
tions, as  is  well  known,  are  still  illicitce,  but 
yet  validas,  and  even  the  Council  of  Chalcedon 
has  not  declared  them  to  be  properly  in  validce, 
but  only  as  without  effect  (by  permanent 
suspension).  Cf.  Kober,  Suspension,  S.  220, 
and  Hergenrother,  Photius,  etc.,  Bd.  ii.,  S. 
324. 


Bright. 

By  the  word  /mp™pia>  ("  martyry  ")  is  meant 
a  church  or  chapel  raised  over  a  martyr's 
grave.  So  the  Laodicene  Council  forbids 
Churchmen  to  visit  the  "martyries  of  here- 
tics" (can.  ix.).  So  Gregory  of  Nyssa  speaks 
of  "  the  martyry  "  of  the  Holy  Martyrs  ( Op.  ii., 
212) ;  Chrysostom  of  a  "martyry,"  and  Palla- 
dius  of  "martyries"  near  Antioch  {In  Act. 
Apost.  Horn.,  xxxviii.,  5  ;  Died.,  p.  17),  and  Pal- 
ladius  of  "the  martyry  of  St.  John"  at  Con- 
stantinople {Dial.,  p.  25).  See  Socrates,  iv.  18, 
23,  on  the  "  martyry  "  of  St.  Thomas  atEdessa, 
and  that  of  SS.  Peter  and  Paul  at  Eorae  ;  and 
vi.  6,  on  the  "  martyry  "  of  St.  Euphenia  at 
Chalcedon  in  which  the  Council  actually  met. 
In  the  distinct  sense  of  a  visible  testimony, 
the  word  was  applied  to  the  church  of  the 
Resurrection  at  Jerusalem  (Eusebius,  Vit.  Con., 
iii.  40,  iv.  40  ;  Mansi,  vi.  564  ;  Cyril,  Catech., 
xiv.  3),  and  to  the  Holy  Sepulchre  itself  ( Vit. 
Con.,  iii.  28).  Churches  raised  over  martyrs' 
tombs  were  called  in  the  West  "  memoriae  mar- 
tyrum"  see  Cod.  Afric,  lxxxiii.  (compare  Au- 
gustine, Dc  Cur  a  pro  Mortuis,  VI.). 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canon ici,  Gratiau's  Dccretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
lxx.,  can.  j. 


CANON  VII. 

We  have  decreed  that  those  who  have  once  been  enrolled  among  the  clergy,  or  have 
been  made  monks,  shall  accept  neither  a  military  charge  nor  any  secular  dignity  ;  and  if 
they  shall  presume  to  do  so  and  not  repent  in  such  wise  as  to  turn  again  to  that  which 
they  had  first  chosen  for  the  love  of  God,  they  shall  be  anathematized. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VII. 


If  any  cleric  or  monk  arrogantly  affects  the 
military  or  any  other  dignity,  let  him  be  cursed. 

Hefele. 
Something  similar  was  ordered  by  the 
lxxxiii.  (lxxxii.)  Apostolic  Canon,  only  that  it 
threatens  the  cleric  who  takes  military  service 
merely  with  deposition  from  his  clerical  office, 
while  our  canon  subjects  him  to  excommuni- 
cation. .  .  .  The  Greek  commentators, 
Balsamon  and  Zonaras,  think  that  our  canon 
selects  a  more  severe  punishment,  that  of 
excommunication,  because  it  has  in  view  those 
clerics  who  have  not  merely  taken  military 
service,  etc.,  but  at  the  same  time  have  laid 
aside  their  clerical  dress  and  put  on  secular 
clothing. 


Bright. 


By  orpaTctav  [which  I  have  translated  (or, 
as  Canon  Bright  thinks,  mistranslated)  "  mili- 
tary charge"],  "militiam,"  is  here  meant,  not 
military  employment  as  such,  but  the  public 
service  in  general.  This  use  of  the  term  is  a 
relic  and  token  of  the  military  basis  of  the 
Roman  monarchy.  The  court  of  the  Impera- 
tor  was  called  his  camp,  o-TpaTomSov  (Cod. 
Theod.,  torn,  ii.,  p.  22),  as  in  Constantine's 
letters  to  John  Archaph  and  the  Council  of 
Tyre  (Athan.,  Apol.  c.  Ari.,  lxx.  8G),  and  in  the 
Vllth  canon  of  Sardica,  so  Athanasius  speaks 
of  the  "  camp  "  of  Constans  {Apol.  ad  Constant, 
iv.),  and  of  that  of  Constantius  at  Milan  {Hist. 
Ari.,  xxxvij.) ;  so  Hosius  uses  the  same  phrase 
in  his  letter  to  Constantius  {ib.  xliv.) ;  so  the 
!  Semi-Arian  bishops,  when  addressing  Jovian 


CHALCEDON.     A.D,  451 


273 


(Soz.,  vi.  4) ;  so  Chrysostoin  in  the  reign  of 
Theodosius  I.  (Horn,  ad  Pop.  Antioch,  vi.  2). 
Similarly,  there  were  officers  of  the  palace 
called  Castrensians  (Tertull.,  Be  Cor.,  12),  as 
being  "milites  alius  generis — de  imperatoria 
familia"  (Gothofred,  Cod.  Theod.,  torn,  ii., 
p.  526).  So  (yrparevecrSaL  is  used  for  holding  a 
place  at  court,  as  in  Soc.,  iv.  9;  Soz.,  vi.  9,  on 
Mareian's  case,  and  a  very  clear  passage  in 
Soc,  v.  25,  where  the  verb  is  applied  to  an 
imperial  secretary.  It  occurs  in  combination 
with  crrparua  in  a  petition  of  an  Alexandrian 
deacon  named  Theodore,  which  was  read  in 
the  third  session  of  Chalcedon:  he  says, 
"  'EorpaTeuortt/ACT'  for  about  twenty-two  years  in 


the  Schola  of  the  magistrians "  (under  the 
Magister  officionum,  or  chief  magistrate  of 
the  palace),  "  but  I  disregarded  arpareia^ 
ToaovTov  xpovav  in  order  to  enter  the  ministry  " 
(Mansi,  vi.,  1008).  See  also  Theodoret,  Eelig. 
Hist.,  xij.,  on  the  emperor's  letter-carriers. 
In  the  same  sense  Honorius,  by  a  law  of 
408,  forbids  non-Catholics  "intra  palatium 
militare  "  (Cod.  Theod.,  xvi.,  5,  42)  ;  and  the 
Vandal  king  Hunneric  speaks  of  "domus 
nostrce  militia;  "  (Victor  Vitens,  iv.  2). 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  II., 
Causa  xx.,  Qugest.  iii.,  Can.  iij. 


CANON  VIII. 

Let  the  clergy  of  the  poor-houses,  monasteries,  and  martyries  remain  under  the 
authority  of  the  bishops  in  every  city  according  to  the  tradition  of  the  holy  Fathers ; 
and  let  no  one  arrogantly  cast  off  the  rule  of  his  own  bishop ;  and  if  any  shall  contravene 
this  canon  in  any  way  whatever,  and  will  not  be  subject  to  their  own  bishop,  if  they  be 
clergy,  let  them  be  subjected  to  canonical  censure,  and  if  they  be  monks  or  laymen,  let 
them  be  excommunicated. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VIII. 


Any  clergyman  in  an  almshouse  or  monastery 
must  submit  himself  to  the  authority  of  the 
bishop  of  the  city.  But  he  ivho  rebels  against 
this  let  him  pay  the  penalty. 

Van  Espen. 

From  this  canon  we  learn  that  the  synod  of 
Chalcedon  willed  that  all  who  were  in  charge 
of  such  pious  institutions  should  be  subject 
to  the  bishop,  and  in  making  this  decree  the 
synod  only  followed  the  tradition  of  the 
Fathers  and  Canons.  Although  in  its  first 
part  the  canon  only  mentions  "clergymen," 
yet  in  the  second  part  monks  are  named,  and, 
as  Balsamon  and  Zonoras  point  out,  both  are 
included. 

Bright. 

What  a  tttu>x^6v  was  may  be  seen  from 
what  Gibbon  calls  the  "  noble  and  charitable 
foundation,  almost  a  new  city"  (iii.  252), 
established  by  St.  Basil  at  a  little  distance 
from  Csesarea,  and  called  in  consequence  the 
Basiliad.  Gregory  Nazianzen  describes  it  as 
a  large  set  of  buildings  with  rooms  for  the 
sick,  especially  for  lepers,  and  also  for  house- 
less travellers  ;  "  a  storehouse  of  piety,  where 
disease  was  borne  philosophically,  and  sympa- 
thy was  tested "  (Orat.,  xliii.,  63,  compare 
Basil   himself,  Epist.,  xciv.,   on  its    staff    of 

VOL.  XIV. 


nurses  and  physicians  and  cl.,  3).  Sozomen 
calls  it  "  a  most  celebrated  resting-place  for 
the  poor,"  and  names  Prapidius  as  having 
been  its  warden  while  acting  as  "bishop  over 
many  villages"  (vi.  34,  see  on  Nic,  viij.). 
Another  irroyxoTpocpuov  is  mentioned  by  Basil 
(Epist.,  cxliij.)  as  governed  by  a  chorepiscopus. 
St.  Chrysostom,  on  coming  to  the  see  of  Con- 
stantinople, ordered  the  excess  of  episcopal 
expenditure  to  be  transferred  to  the  hospital 
for  the  sick  (vo<tokojxu.ov),  and  "founded  other 
such  hospitals,  setting  over  them  two  pious 
presbyters,  with  physicians  and  cooks.  .  .  . 
so  that  foreigners  arriving  in  the  city,  on 
being  attacked  by  disease,  might  receive  aid, 
both  because  it  was  a  good  work  in  itself,  and 
for  the  glory  of  the  Saviour  "  (Palladius,  Biol., 
p.  19).  At  Ephesus  Bassian  founded  a 
TTTd>xeiTov  with  seventy  pallets  for  the  sick 
(Mansi,  vii.,  277),  and  there  were  several  such 
houses  in  Egypt  (ib.,  vi.,  1013;  in  the  next 
century  there  was  a  hospital  for  the  sick  at 
Daphne  near  Antioch  (Evagr.,  iv.,  35).  "  The 
tradition  of  the  holy  fathers  "  is  here  cited  as 
barring  any  claim  on  the  part  of  clerics  offici- 
ating in  these  institutions,  or  in  monasteries 
or  martyries,  to  be  exempt  from  the  juris- 
diction of  the  ordinary.  They  are  to  "abide 
under  it,"  and  not  to  indulge  selfwill  by 
"  turning  restive  "  against  their  bishop's  au- 
thority "  (a<(rr]via£u  is  literally  to  get  the  bit 
between  the  teeth,  and  is  used  by  Aetius  for 


274 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


"not  choosing  to  obey,"  Mansi,  vii.,  72). 
Those  who  dare  to  violate  this  clearly  defined 
rule  (Starvn-ojo-u',  comp.  tvtto%  in  Nia,  xix.),  and 
to  refuse  subjection  to  their  own  bishop,  are, 
if  clerics,  to  incur  canonical  censure,  if  monks 
or  laics,  to  be  excommunicated.      The  allu- 


sion to  laics  points  to  laymen  as  foundei-s  or 
benefactors  of  such  institutions. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 
XVIIL,  Q.  II.,  canon  x.;  §  3. 


CANON  IX. 

If  any  Clergyman  have  a  matter  against  another  clergyman,  he  shall  not  forsake  his 
bishop  and  run  to  secular  courts ;  but  let  him  first  lay  open  the  matter  before  his  own 
Bishop,  or  let  the  matter  be  submitted  to  any  person  whom  each  of  the  parties  may,  with 
the  Bishop's  consent,  select.  And  if  any  one  shall  contravene  these  decrees,  let  him  be 
subjected  to  canonical  penalties.  And  if  a  clergyman  have  a  complaint  against  his  own 
or  any  other  bishop,  let  it  be  decided  by  the  synod  of  the  province.  And  if  a  bishop 
or  clergyman  should  have  a  difference  with  the  metropolitan  of  the  province,  let  him 
have  recourse  to  the  Exarch  of  the  Diocese,  or  to  the  throne  of  the  Imperial  City  of 
Constantinople,  and  there  let  it  be  tried. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  IX. 


Litigious  clerics  shall  be  punished  according 
to  canon,  if  tliey  despise  the  cpiscop>al  and  resort 
to  the  secular  tribunal.  When  a  cleric  has  a 
contention  loith  a  bishop  let  him  wait  till  the 
synod  sits,  and  if  a  bishop  have  a  contention 
with  his  metropolitan  let  him  carry  the  case  to 
Constantinople. 

Johnson. 

Let  the  reader  observe  that  here  is  a  greater 
privilege  given  by  a  General  Council  to  the 
see  of  Constantinople  than  ever  was  given  by 
any  council,  even  that  of  Sardica,  to  the  bishop 
of  Rome,  viz.,  that  any  bishop  or  clergyman 
might  at  the  first  instance  bring  his  cause  be- 
fore the  bishop  of  Constantinoj^le  if  the  de- 
fendant were  a  metropolitan. 

Hefele. 

That  our  canon  would  refer  not  merely  the 
ecclesiastical,  but  the  civil  differences  of  the 
clergy,  in  the  first  case,  to  the  bishop,  is  beyond 
a  doubt.  And  it  comes  out  as  clearly  from 
the  word  Trporepov  (=  at  first)  that  it  does  not 
absolutely  exclude  a  reference  to  the  secular 
judges,  but  regards  it  as  allowable  only  when 
the  first  attempt  at  an  adjustment  of  the  con- 
troversy by  the  bishop  has  miscarried.  This 
was  quite  clearly  recognized  by  Justinian  in 
his  123d  Novel,  c.  21 :  "  If  any  one  has  a 
case  against  a  cleric,  or  a  monk,  or  a  dea- 
coness, or  a  nun,  or  an  ascetic,  he  shall  first 
make  application  to  the  bishop  of  his  oppo- 
nent, and  he  shall  decide.  If  both  parties 
are  satisfied  with  his  decision,  it  shall  then  be 


I  carried  into  effect  by  the  imperial  judge  of  the 
locality.  If,  however,  one  of  the  contending 
parties  lodges  an  appeal  against  the  bishop's 
judgment  within  ten  days,  then  the  imperial 
judge  of  the  locality  shall  decide  the  mat- 
ter. There  is  no  doubt  that  the  expression 
"Exarch"  employed  in  our  canon,  and  also 
in  canon  17,  means,  in  the  first  place,  those 
superior  metropolitans  who  have  several 
ecclesiastical  provinces  under  them.  Whether, 
however,  the  great  patriarchs,  properly  so 
called,  are  to  be  included  under  it,  may  be 
doubted.  The  Emperor  Justinian,  in  c.  22 
of  his  Novel  just  qiioted  (7.  c.)  in  our  text  has, 
without  further  explanation,  substituted  the 
expression  Patriarch  for  Exarch,  and  in  the 
same  way  the  commentator  Aristenus  has  de- 
clared both  terms  to  be  identical,  adding  that 
only  the  Patriarch  of  Constantinople  has  the 
privilege  of  having  a  metropolitan  tried  be- 
fore him  who  does  not  belong  to  his  patri- 
archate, but  is  subject  to  another  patriarch. 
In  the  same  way  our  canon  was  understood 
by  Beveridge.  Van  Espen,  on  the  contrary, 
thinks  that  the  Synod  had  here  in  view  only 
the  exarchs  in  the  narrower  sense  (of  Ephesus, 
Caesarea),  but  not  the  Patriarchs,  properly  so 
called,  of  Rome,  Alexandria,  Antioch,  and 
Jerusalem,  as  it  would  be  too  great  a  violation 
of  the  ancient  canons,  particularly  of  the  6th 
of  Nicsea,  to  have  set  aside  the  proper  patri- 
arch and  have  allowed  an  appeal  to  the  Bishop 
of  Constantinople  (with  this  Zonaras  also 
agrees  in  his  explanation  of  canon  17).  Least 
of  all,  however,  would  the  Synod  have  made 
such  a  rule  for  the  West,  i.e.,  have  allowed 
that  any  one  should  set  aside  the  Patriarch  of 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


275 


Rome  and  appeal  to  the  Patriarch  of  Constan- 
tinople, since  they  themselves,  in  canon  28, 
assigned  the  first  place  in  rank  to  Rome. 

It  appears  to  me  that  neither  Beveridge,  etc., 
nor  Van  Espen  are  fully  in  the  right,  while 
each  is  partially  so.  With  Van  Espen  we 
must  assume  that  our  Synod,  in  drawing  up 
this  canon,  had  in  view  only  the  Greek  Church, 
and  not  the  Latin  as  well,  particularly  as 
neither  the  papal  legates  nor  any  Latin  bishop 
whatever  was  present  at  the  drawing  tip  of 
these  canons.  On  the  other  hand,  Beveridge 
is  also  right  in  maintaining  that  the  Synod 
made  no  distinction  between  the  patriarchs 
proper  and  the  exarchs  (such  a  distinction 
must  otherwise  have  been  indicated  in  the 
text),  and  allowed  that  quarrels  which  should 
arise  among  the  bishops  of  other  patriarchates 
might  be  tried  at  Constantinople.  Only  that 
Beveridge  ought  to  have  excepted  the  West 
and  Rome. 

The  strange  part  of  our  canon  may  be  ex- 


plained in  the  following  manner.  There  were 
always  many  bishops  at  Constantinople  from 
the  most  different  places,  who  came  there  to 
lay  their  contentions  and  the  like  before  the 
Emperor.  The  latter  frequently  referred  the 
decision  to  the  bishop  of  Constantinople,  who 
then,  in  union  with  the  then  present  bishops 
from  the  most  different  provinces,  held  a 
"  Home  Synod "  and  gave  the  sentence  re- 
quired at  this.  Thus  gradually  the  practice 
was  formed  of  controversies  being  decided  by 
bishops  of  other  patriarchates  or  exarchates 
at  Constantinople,  to  the  setting  aside  of  the 
proper  superior  metropolitan,  an  example  of 
which  we  have  seen  in  that  famous  Synod 
of  Constantinople,  a.d.  448,  at  which  the  case 
of  Eutyches  was  the  first  time  brought  for- 
ward. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Oratian's  Decretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 
XL,  Q.  I.,  canon  xlvj. 


CANON  X. 

It  shall  not  be  lawful  for  a  clergyman  to  be  at  the  same  time  enrolled  in  the  churches 
of  two  cities,  that  is,  in  the  church  in  which  he  was  at  first  ordained,  and  in  another  to 
which,  because  it  is  greater,  he  has  removed  from  lust  of  empty  honour.  And  those 
who  do  so  shall  be  returned  to  their  own  church  in  which  they  were  originally  ordained, 
and  there  only  shall  they  minister.  But  if  any  one  has  heretofore  been  removed  from 
one  church  to  another,  he  shall  not  intermeddle  with  the  affairs  of  his  former  church,  nor 
with  the  martyries,  almshouses,  and  hostels  belonging  to  it.  And  if,  after  the  decree  of 
this  great  and  ecumenical  Synod,  any  shall  dare  to  do  any  of  these  things  now  forbid- 
den, the  synod  decrees  that  he  shall  be  degraded  from  his  rank. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  X. 


No  clerk  shall  be  recorded  on  the  clergy-list  of 
the  churches  of  two  cities.  But  if  he  shall  have 
strayed  forth,  let  him  be  returned  to  his  former 
place.  But  if  he  has  been  transferred,  let  him 
have  no  share  in  the  affairs  of  his  former  church 

Van  Espen,  following  Christian  Lupus,  re- 
marks that  this  canon  is  opposed  to  pluralities. 
For  if  a  clergyman  has  by  presentation  and 
institution  obtained  two  churches,  he  is  en- 
rolled in  two  churches  at  the  same  time,  con- 
trary to  this  canon  ;  but  surely  that  this  be 
the  case,  the  two  churches  must  needs  be  in 
two  cities,  and  that,  in  the  days  of  Chalcedon, 
meant  in  two  dioceses. 

Bright. 

Here  a  new  institution  comes  into  view,  of 
which  there  were  many  instances.    Julian  had 

T 


directed  Pagan  hospices  (fei'oSoxeia)  to  be  es- 
tablished on  the  Christian  model  (Epist.  xlix.). 
The  Basiliad  at  Cresarea  was  a  tjevoSox^ov  as 
well  as  a  Trrw^dov ;  it  contained  Kcn-ayaryia  tois 
£eVois,  as  well  as  for  wayfayers,  and  those  who 
needed  assistance  on  account  of  illness,  and 
Basil  distinguished  various  classes  of  persons 
engaged  in  charitable  ministrations,  including 
those  who  escorted  the  traveller  on  his  way 
(rovs  Trapaire/jLTTovTas,  Epist.  xciv. ) .  Jerome  writes 
to  Pammachius:  "I  hear  that  you  have  made 
a  '  xenodochion '  in  the  port  of  Rome,"  and 
adds  that  he  himself  had  built  a  "diverso- 
rium  "  for  pilgrims  to  Bethlehem  [Epist.  xvi., 
11,  14).  Chrysostom  reminds  his  auditors  at 
Constantinople  that  "there  is  a  common 
dwelling  set  apart  by  the  Church,"  and  "called 
a  xenon"  {in  Act.  Horn.,  xlv.  4).  His  friend 
Olympias  was  munificent  to  "  xenotrophia  " 
(Hist.  Lausiac,  144) .  There  was  a  xenodochion 
near  the  church  of  the  monastic  settlement  at 


276 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


Nitria  {lb.,  7).  Ischyrion,  in  Ms  memorial  read 
in  the  3d  session  of  Chalcedon,  complains  of 
his  patriarch  Dioscorus  for  having  misapplied 
funds  bequeathed  by  a  charitable  lady  rots 
ieviwa-i  Kal  -n-Tw^eiots  in  Egypt,  and  says  that  he 
himself  had  been  confined  by  Dioscorus  in  a 
"xenon"  for  lepers  (Mansi,  vi.  1013,  1017). 
Justinian  mentions  xenodochia  in  Cod.,  i.  3, 
49,  and  their  wardens  in  Novell.,  134,  16. 
Gregory  the  Great  orders  that  the  accounts 
of  xenodochia  should  be  audited  by  the  bishop 
(Ejnst.  iv.,  27).     Charles  the  Great  provides 


for  the  restoration  of  decayed  "senodochia" 
(Capitul.  of  803  ;  Pertz,  Leg.,  i.  110) ;  and 
Alcuin  exhorts  his  pupil,  archbishop  Ean- 
bald,  to  think  where  in  the  diocese  of  York 
he  could  establish  "xenodochia,  id  est,  hos- 
pitalia"  {Epist.  L.). 


This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Ganonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 
XXL,  Q.  I.,  canon  ij.,  and  again  Causa  XXL, 
Q.  II.,  canon  iij. 


CANON  XI. 

We  have  decreed  that  the  poor  and  those  needing  assistance  shall  travel,  after  exam- 
ination, with  letters  merely  pacifical  from  the  church,  and  not  with  letters  commendatory, 
inasmuch  as  letters  commendatory  ought  to  be  given  only  to  persons  who  are  open  to 
suspicion. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XL 

Let  the  poor  who  stand  in  need  of  help  make 
their  journey  with  tetters  pacificatory  and  not 
commendatory :  For  letters  commendatory  should 
only  be  given  to  those  who  are  open  to  suspicion. 

Aeistenus. 

.  .  .  The  poor  who  need  help  should 
journey  with  letters  pacificatory  from  the 
bishop,  so  that  those  who  have  the  ability  to 
help  them  may  be  moved  with  pity.  These 
need  no  letters  commendatory,  such  letters 
should  be  shown,  however,  by  presbyters  and 
deacons,  and  by  the  rest  of  the  clergy. 

See  notes  on  canons  vij.,  viij.,  and  xj.  of  An- 
tioch  ;  and  on  canon  xlij.  of  Laodicea. 

Hefele. 

The  mediaeval  commentators,  Balsamon, 
Zonaras,  and  Aristenus,  understand  this  canon 
to  mean  that  letters  of  commendation,  cruo-ra- 
TtKal,  commendatitice  litterce  were  given  to 
those  laymen  and  clerics  who  were  previously 
subject  to  ecclesiastical  censure,  and  therefore 
were  suspected  by  other  bishops,  and  for  this 
reason  needed  a  special  recommendation,  in 


order  to  be  received  in  another  church  into 
the  number  of  the  faithful.  The  letters  of 
peace  (eipijviKai)  on  the  contrary,  were  given 
to  those  who  were  in  undisturbed  communion 
with  their  bishop,  and  had  not  the  least  evil 
reputation  abroad. 

Our  canon  was  understood  quite  differently 
by  the  old  Latin  writers,  Dionysius  Exiguus 
and  Isidore,  who  translate  the  words  iv  iwo- 
Xr/xpei  by personce  honoratiores  and  clariores,  and 
the  learned  Bishop  Gabriel  Aubespine  of  Or- 
leans has  endeavored  to  prove,  in  his  notes  to 
our  canon,  that  the  litterce  pacificce  were  given 
to  ordinary  believers,  and  the  commendatitice 
(avo-TOLTLKai)  on  the  contrary,  only  to  clerics 
and  to  distinguished  laymen ;  and  in  favour 
of  this  view  is  the  xiii.  canon  of  Chalcedon. 

With  regard  to  this  much-vexed  point,  au- 
thorities are  so  divided  that  no  absolute  judg- 
ment can  be  arrived  at.  The  interpretation  I 
have  followed  is  that  of  the  Greeks  and  of 
Hervetus,  which  seems  to  be  supported  by 
Apostolic  Canon  XIIL,  and  was  that  adopted 
by  Johnson  and  Hammond.  On  the  other 
hand  are  the  Prisca,  Dionysius,  Isidore,  Tille- 
mont,  Bouth,  and  to  these  Bright  seems  to 
unite  himself  by  saying  that  this  "  sense  is  the 
more  natural." 


CANON  XII. 

It  has  come  to  our  knowledge  that  certain  persons,  contrary  to  the  laws  of  the  Church, 
having  had  recourse  to  secular  powers,  have  by  means  of  imperial  rescripts  divided  one 
Province  into  two,  so  that  there  are  consequently  two  metropolitans  in  one  province ; 
therefore  the  holy  Synod  has  decreed  that  for  the  future  no  such  thing  shall  be  at- 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


277 


tempted  by  a  bishop,  since  lie  who  shall  undertake  it  shall  be  degraded  from  his  rank. 
But  the  cities  which  have  already  been  honoured  by  means  of  imperial  letters  with  the 
name  of  metropolis,  and  the  bishops  in  charge  of  them,  shall  take  the  bare  title,  all 
metropolitan  rights  being  preserved  to  the  true  Metropolis. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XII. 


One  province  shall  not  be  cut  into  two. 
Whoever  shall  do  this  shall  be  cast  out  of  the 
episcopate.  Such  cities  as  are  cut  off  by  im- 
perial rescript  shall  enjoy  only  the  honour  of 
having  a  bishop  settled  in  them :  but  all  the 
rights  pertaining  to  the  true  metropolis  shall  be 
preserved. 

Bright. 

We  learn  from  this  canon,  there  were  cases 
in  which  an  ambitious  prelate,  "  by  making 
application  to  the  government"  ("secular 
powers  ")  had  obtained  what  are  called  "  prag- 
matic letters,"  and  employed  them  for  the 
purpose  of  "dividing  one  province  into  two," 
and  exalting  himself  as  a  metropolitan.  The 
name  of  a  "pragmatic  sanction"  is  more 
familiar  in  regard  to  mediaeval  and  modern 
history  ;  it  recalls  the  name  of  St.  Louis,  and, 
still  more,  that  of  the  Emperor  Charles  VI. 
the  father  of  Maria  Theresa.  Properly  a 
"pragmatic"  was  a  deliberate  order  promul- 
gated by  the  Emperor  after  full  hearing 
of  advice,  on  some  public  affair.  We  find 
"pragmatici  nostri  statnta"  in  a  law  of  a.  d. 
431.  (Cod.  Theod.,  xi.  1,  36) ;  and  pragmatici 
prioris,"  "  sub  hac  pragmatica  jussione,"  in 
ordinances  in  Append,  to  Cod.  Theod., 
pp.  95,  162;  and  the  empress  Pulcheria, 
about  a  year  before  the  Council,  had  in- 
formed Leo  that  her  husband  Marcian  had  re- 
called some  exiled  orthodox  bishops  "  robore 
pragmatici  sui"  (Leon.,  Epist.  lxxvij.).  Jus- 
tinian speaks  of  "  pragmaticas  nostras  f  ormas  " 
and  " pragmaticum typum  "(Novel.,  7,  9,  etc.). 
The  phrase  was  adopted  from  his  legislation 
by  Louis  the  Pious  and  his  colleague  -  son 
Lothar  (compare  Novel.  7,  2  with  Pertz,  Mon. 
Germ,  Hist.  Leg.,  i.,  254),  and  hence  it  came 
to  be  used  both  by  later  German  emperors  (see, 
e.g.,  Bryce's  Holy  Roman  Empire,  p.  212),  and 
by  the  French  kings  (Kitchin,  Hist.  France, 
i.  343,  544).  Augustine  explains  it  by 
"  prseceptum  imperatoris  "  (Brev.  Collat.  cum 
Donatist.  iii.,  2),  and  Balsamon  in  his  comment 
uses  an  equivalent  phrase  ;  and  so  in  the 
record  of  the  fourth  session  of  Chalcedon  we 
have  9ela  ypa/xjaara  ("divine"  being  practically 
equivalent  to  "imperial")  explained  by  -n-pay- 
/aariKoiis  tvttovs  (Mansi,vii.,  89).     We  must  ob- 


serve that  the  imperial  order,  in  the  cases  con- 
templated by  the  canon,  had  only  conferred 
the  title  of  "  metropolis  "  on  the  city,  and  had 
not  professed  to  divide  the  province  for  civil, 
much  less  for  ecclesiastical,  purposes.  Valens, 
indeed,  had  divided  the  province  of  Cappa- 
docia,  when  in  371  he  made  Tyana  a  metropo- 
lis :  and  therefore  Anthimns,  bishop  of  Tyana, 
when  he  claimed  the  position  of  a  metropoli- 
tan, Avith  authority  over  suffragans,  was  mak- 
ing a  not  unnatural  inference  in  regard  to 
ecclesiastical  limits  from  political  rearrange- 
ments of  territory,  as  Gregory  of  Nazianzus 
says  (Orat.  xliii.,  58),  whereas  Basil  "held  to 
the  old  custom,"  i.e.,  to  the  traditional  unity 
of  his  provincial  church,  although  after  a 
while  he  submitted  to  what  he  could  not  hin- 
der (see  Tillemont,  ix.,  175,  182,  670).  But  in 
the  case  of  Eustathius  of  Berytus,  which  was 
clearly  in  the  Council's  mind,  the  Phoenician 
province  had  not  been  divided;  it  was  in 
reliance  on  a  mere  title  bestowed  upon  his 
city,  and  also  on  an  alleged  synoclical  ordi- 
nance which  issued  in  fact  from  the  so-called 
"  Home  Synod  "  that  he  declared  himself  in- 
dependent of  his  metropolitan,  Photius  of 
Tyre,  and  brought  six  bishoprics  under  his 
assumed  jurisdiction.  Thus  while  the  prov- 
ince remained  politically  one,  he  had  de  facto 
divided  it  ecclesiastically  into  two.  Photius 
petitioned  Marcian,  who  referred  the  case  to 
the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  and  it  was  taken 
up  in  the  fourth  session.  The  imperial  com- 
missioners announced  that  it  was  to  be  settled 
not  according  to  "pragmatic  forms,"  but  ac- 
cording to  those  which  had  been  enacted  by 
the  Fathers  (Mansi,  vii.,  89).  This  encouraged 
the  Council  to  say,  "  A  pragmatic  can  have  no 
force  against  the  canons."  The  commission- 
ers asked  whether  it  was  lawful  for  bishops, 
on  the  ground  of  a  pragmatic,  to  steal  away 
the  rights  of  other  churches?  The  answer 
was  explicit :  "  No,  it  is  against  the  canon." 
The  Council  proceeded  to  cancel  the  resolu- 
tion of  the  Home  Synod  in  favour  of  the  eleva- 
tion of  Berytus,  ordered  the  4th  Nicene  canon 
to  be  read,  and  upheld  the  metropolitical 
rights  of  Tyre.  The  commissioners  also  pro- 
nounced against  Eustathius.  Cecropius,  bish- 
op of  Sebastopolis,  requested  them  to  put  an 
end  to  the  issue  of  pragmatics  made  to  the 
detriment  of  the  canons ;  the  Council  echoed 


278 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


this  request ;  and  the  commissioners  granted 
it  by  declaring  that  the  canons  should  every- 
where stand  good  (Mansi,  vii.,  89-97).  We 
may  connect  with  this  incident  a  law  of  Mar- 
tian dated  in  454,  by  which  "all  pragmatic 
sanctions,  obtained  by  means  of  favour  or 
ambition  in  opposition  to  the  canon  of  the 
Church,  are  declared  to  be  deprived  of  effect " 
(Cod.  Justin,  i.,  2,  12). 

To  this  decision  the  present  canon  looks 
back,  when  it  forbids  any  bishop,  on  pain  of 
deposition,  to  presume  to  do  as  Eustathius 
had  done,  since  it  decrees  that  "he  who  at- 
tempts to  do  so  shall  fall  from  his  own  rank 
((3a$jj.ov)  in  the  Church.  And  cities  which  have 
already  obtained  the  honorary  title  of  a  me- 
tropolis from  the  emperor  are  to  enjoy  the 
honour  only,  and  their  bishops  to  be  but  hon- 
orary metropolitans,  so  that  all  the  rights  of 
the  real  metropolis  are  to  be  reserved  to  it." 
So,  at  the  end  of  the  6th  session  the  emperor 
had  announced  that  Chalcedon  was  to  be  a 
titular  metropolis,  saving  all  the  rights  of  Nico- 
media;  and  the  Council  had  expressed  its  as- 
sent (Mansi,  xii.,  177;  cf.  Le  Quien,  L,  602). 
Another  case  was  discussed  in  the  13th  ses- 
sion of  the  Council.  Anastasius  of  Nicaea  had 
claimed  to  be  independent  of  his  metropolitan 


Eunomius  of  Nicomedia,  on  the  ground  of  an 
ordinance  of  Valens,  recognising  the  city  of 
Nictea  as  by  old  custom  a  "metropolis."  Eu- 
nomius, who  complained  of  Anastasius's  en- 
croachments, appealed  to  a  later  ordinance, 
guaranteeing  to  the  capital  of  Bithynia  its 
rights  as  unaffected  by  the  honour  conferred 
on  Nicaea  :  the  Council  expressed  its  mind  in 
favour  of  Eunomius,  and  the  dispute  was  set- 
tled by  a  decision  "  that  the  bishop  of  Nico- 
media should  have  metropolitical  authority 
over  the  Bithynian  churches,  while  the  bishop 
of  Nicrca  should  have  merely  the  honour  of  a 
metropolitan,  being  subjected,  like  the  other 
comprovincials,  to  the  bishop  of  Nicomedia 
(Mansi,  vii.,  313).  Zonaras  says  that  tins  canon 
was  in  his  time  no  longer  observed  ;  and  Bal- 
samon  says  that  when  the  primates  of  Heraclea 
and  Ancyra  cited  it  as  upholding  their  claim 
to  perform  the  consecration  of  two  "hono- 
rary metropolitans,"  they  were  overruled  by  a 
decree  of  Alexius  Comnenus,  "in  presence 
and  with  consent"  of  a  synod  (on  Trullan, 
canon  xxxviij.). 

The  first  part  of  this  canon  is  found  in  the 
Corpus    Juris    Canonici,   Graf  Dccretum, 

Pars  I.,  Dist.  ci.,  canon  j. 


CANON  XIII. 

Strange  and  unknown  clergymen  without  letters  commendatory  from  their  own 
Bishop,  are  absolutely  prohibited  from  officiating  in  another  city. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XIII. 

No  cleric  shall  be  received  to  communion  in 
another  city  without  a  letter  commendatory. 

"Unknown  clergymen."  I  have  here  fol- 
lowed the  reading  of  the  Greek  commenta- 
tors.    But  the  translators  of  the  Prisca,  and 


Dionysius,  and  Isidore  must  have  all  read 
di'aynooTas  (i.e.,  Readers)  instead  of  ayvworow;. 
Justellus,  Hervetus,  and  Beveridge,  as  also 
Johnson  and  Hammond,  follow  the  reading  of 
the  text.  Hefele  suggests  that  if  "  Readers  " 
is  the  correct  reading  perhaps  it  means,  "  all 
clergymen  even  readers." 


CANON  XIV. 

Since  in  certain  provinces  it  is  permitted  to  the  readers  and  singers  to  marry,  the 
holy  Synod  has  decreed  that  it  shall  not  be  lawful  for  any  of  them  to  take  a  Avife  that  is 
heterodox.  But  those  who  have  already  begotten  children  of  such  a  marriage,  if  they 
have  already  had  their  children  baptized  among  the  heretics,  must  bring  them  into  the 
communion  of  the  Catholic  Church  ;  but  if  they  have  not  had  them  baptized,  they  may 
not  hereafter  baptize  them  among  heretics,  nor  give  them  in  marriage  to  a  heretic,  or  a 
Jew,  or  a  heathen,  unless  the  person  manying  the  orthodox  child  shall  promise  to  come 
over  to  the  orthodox  faith.  And  if  any  one  shall  transgress  this  decree  of  the  holy 
synod,  let  him  be  subjected  to  canonical  censure. 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


279 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XIV. 


A  Cantor  or  Lector  alien  to  the  sound  faith, 
if  being  then  married,  he  shall  have  begotten 
children  let  him  bring  them  to  communion,  if 
they  had  there  been  baptized.  But  if  they  had 
not  yet  been  baptized  they  shall  not  be  baptized 
afterwards  by  the  heretics. 


Akistenus. 

The  tenth  and  thirty-first  canons  of  the 
Synod  of  Laodicea  and  the  second  of  the 
Sixth  Synod  in  Trullo,  and  this  present  canon 
forbid  one  of  the  orthodox  to  be  joined  in 
marriage  with  a  woman  who  is  a  heretic,  or 
vice  versa.  But  if  any  of  the  Cantors  or  Lec- 
tors had  taken  a  wife  of  another  sect  before 
these  canons  were  set  forth,  and  had  had 
children  by  her,  and  had  had  them  baptized 
while  yet  he  remained  among  the  heretics, 
these  he  should  bring  to  the  communion  of 
the  Catholic  Church.  But  if  they  had  not 
yet  been  baptized,  he  must  not  turn  bach 
and  have  them  baptized  among  heretics. 
But  departing  thence  let  him  lead  them  to 
the  Catholic  Church  and  enrich  them  with 
divine  baptism. 

Heeele. 

According  to  the  Latin  translation  of 
Dionysius  Exiguus,  who  speaks  only  of  the 
daughters  of  the  lectors,  etc.,  the  meaning- 
may  be  understood,  with  Christian  Lupus,  as 
being  that  only  their  daughters  must  not  be 
married  to  heretics  or  Jews  or  heathen,  but 
that  the  sons  of  readers  may  take  wives  who 
are  heretics,  etc.,  because  that  men  are  less 
easily  led  to  fall  away  from  the  faith  than 
women.  But  the  Greek  text  makes  here  no 
distinction  between  sons  and  daughters. 


Bright. 


It  is  to  Victor  that  we  owe  the  most  strik- 
ing of  all  anecdotes  about  readers.  During 
the  former  persecution  under  Genseric  (or 
Gaiseric),  the  Arians  attacked  a  Catholic  con- 
gregation on  Easter  Sunday ;  and  while  a 
reader  was  standing  alone  in  the  pulpit,  and 
chanting  the  "Alleluia  melody"  (cf.  Ham- 
mond, Liturgies,  p.  95),  an  arrow  pierced  his 
throat,  the  "  codex  "  dropped  from  his  hands, 
and  he  fell  down  dead  (De  Pcrsec.  Vand.,  i., 
13).  Five  years  before  the  Council,  a  boy  of 
eight  named  Epiphanius  was  made  a  reader  in 
the  church  of  Pavia,  and  in  process  of  time 
became  famous  as  its  bishop.  Justinian  for- 
bade readers  to  be  appointed  under  eighteen 
(Novel.,  134,  13).  The  office  is  described  in 
the  Greek  Euchologion  as  "the  first  step  to 
the  priesthood,"  and  is  conferred  with  delivery 
of  the  book  containing  the  Epistles.  Isidore 
of  Seville,  in  the  seventh  century,  tells  us 
that  the  bishop  ordained  a  reader  bydeliver- 
ing  to  him  "coram  plebe,"  the  "codex"  of 
Scripture  :  and  after  giving  precise  directions 
as  to  pronunciation  and  accentuation,  says 
that  the  readers  were  of  old  called  "heralds" 
(De  Eccl.  Offic,  ii.,  11).  (b)  The  Singers  are 
placed  by  the  xliijrd.  Apostolic  canon  between 
subdeacons  and  readers,  but  they  rank  below 
readers  in  Laodic,  c.  23,  in  the  Liturgy  of  St. 
Mark  (Hammond,  p.  173),  and  in  the  canons 
wrongly  ascribed  to  a  iVth  Council  of  Car- 
thage, Avhich  permit  a  presbyter  to  appoint  a 
"psalmist"  without  the  bishop's  knowledge, 
and  rank  him  even  below  the  doorkeepers 
(Mansi,  iii.,  952).  The  chief  passage  respect- 
ing the  ancient  "  singers"  is  Laodic,  xv. 

The  first  part  of  this  canon  is  found  in  the 
Corpus  Juris  Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum, 
Pars  I.,  Dist.  xxxii.,  c.  xv. 


CANON  XV. 

A  WOMAN  shall  not  receive  the  laying  on  of  hands  as  a  deaconess  under  forty  years  of 
age,  and  then  only  after  searching  examination.  And  if,  after  she  has  had  hands  laid 
on  her  and  has  continued  for  a  time  to  minister,  she  shall  despise  the  grace  of  God  and 
give  herself  in  marriage,  she  shall  be  anathematized  and  the  man  united  to  her. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XV. 


No  person  shall  be  ordained  deaconess  except 
she  be  forty  years  of  age.  If  she  shall  dishon- 
our her  ministry  by  contracting  a  marriage,  let 
her  be  anathema. 


This  canon  should  be  read  carefully  in  con- 
nexion with  what  is  said  in  the  Excursus  on 
deaconesses  to  canon  xix.  of  Nice. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 
XXVII.,  Queest.  L,  Canon  xxiij. 


280 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


CANON  XVI. 

It  is  not  lawful  for  a  virgin  who  lias  dedicated  herself  to  the  Lord  God,  nor  for 
monks,  to  marry ;  and  if  they  are  found  to  have  done  this,  let  them  be  excommunicated. 
But  we  decree  that  in  every  place  the  bishop  shall  have  the  power  of  indulgence  towards 
them. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XVI. 

Monks  or  nuns  shall  not  contract  marriage, 
and  if  they  do  so  let  them  be  excommunicated. 

Van  Espen. 

Since  this  canon  says  nothing  at  all  of  sepa- 
ration in  connexion  with  a  marriage  made 
contrary  to  a  vow,  but  only  orders  separation 
from  communion,  it  seems  very  likely  that 
vows  of  this  kind  at  the  time  of  the  synod 
were  not  considered  diriment  but  only  impe- 
dient  impediments  from  which  the  bishop  of 
the  diocese  could  dispense  at  least  as  far  as 
the  canonical  punishment  was  concerned. 

Hefele. 

The  last  part  of  the  canon  gives  the  bishop 
authority  in  certain  circumstances  not  to  in- 
flict the  excommunication  which  is  threatened 


in  the  first  part,  or  again  to  remove  it.  Thus 
all  the  old  Latin  translators  understood  our 
text ;  but  Dionysius  Exiguus  and  the  Prisca 
added  confitentibus,  meaning,  "  if  such  a  virgin 
or  monk  confess  and  repent  their  fault,  then 
the  bishop  may  be  kind  to  them."  That  the 
marriage  of  a  monk  is  invalid,  as  was  ruled  by 
later  ecclesiastical  law,  our  canon  does  not 
say ;  on  the  contrary,  it  assumes  its  validity, 
as  also  the  marriages  contracted  by  priests 
until  the  beginning  of  the  twelfth  century 
were  regarded  as  valid. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 
xxvii.,  Qusest.  I.,  canon  xxii.,  from  Isidore's 
version  ;  it  is  also  found  in  Dionysius's  ver- 
sion as  canon  xij.  of  the  same  Qusestio,  Causa, 
and  Part,  where  it  is  said  to  be  taken  "ex 
Concilio  Triburiensi." 


CANON  XVII. 

Outlying  or  rural  parishes  shall  in  every  province  remain  subject  to  the  bishops  who 
now  have  jurisdiction  over  them,  particularly  if  the  bishops  have  peaceably  and  continu- 
ously governed  them  for  the  space  of  thirty  years.  But  if  within  thirty  years  there  has 
been,  or  is,  any  dispute  concerning  them,  it  is  lawful  for  those  who  hold  themselves 
aggrieved  to  bring  their  cause  before  the  synod  of  the  province.  And  if  any  one  be 
wronged  by  his  metropolitan,  let  the  matter  be  decided  by  the  exarch  of  the  diocese  or 
by  the  throne  of  Constantinople,  as  aforesaid.  And  if  any  city  has  been,  or  shall  here- 
after be  newly  erected  by  imperial  authority,  let  the  order  of  the  ecclesiastical  parishes 
follow  the  political  and  municipal  example. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XVII. 


Village  and  rural  parishes  if  they  have  been 
possessed  for  thirty  years,  they  shall  so  continue. 
But  if  within  that  time,  the  matter  shall  be  sub- 
ject to  adjudication.  But  if  by  the  command  of 
the  Emperor  a  city  be  renewed,  the  order  of  ec- 
clesiastical parishes  shall  follow  the  civil  and 
public  forms. 

Beight. 

The  adjective  eyxwpious  is  probably  synony- 
mous with  dypoiKiKas  ("rusticas,"  Prisca),  al- 
though Dionysius  and  Isidorian  take  in  as 
"  situated  on  estates,"  cf.  Routh,  Scr.  Opusc, 


ii.,  109.  It  was  conceivable  that  some  such 
outlying  districts  might  form,  ecclesiastically, 
a  border-land,  it  might  not  be  easy  to  assign 
them  definitively  to  this  or  that  bishopric.  In 
such  a  case,  says  the  Council,  if  the  bishop 
who  is  now  in  possession  of  these  rural 
churches  can  show  a  prescription  of  thirty 
years  in  favour  of  his  see,  let  them  remain 
undisturbed  in  his  obedience.  (Here  aftulaTw; 
may  be  illustrated  from  fiiacrdfAevos  in  Eph.  viij. 
and  for  the  use  of  otKovo/xei^  see  I.  Const.,  ij.) 
But  the  border-land  might  be  the  "  debate- 
able"  land  :  the  two  neighbour  bishops  might 
dispute  as  to  the  right  to  tend  these  "  sheep 
in  the  wilderness  ; "  as  we  read  in  Cod.  Afric, 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


281 


117,  "  multaa  controversial  postea  inter  episco- 
pos  cle  dicecesibus  ortse  sunt,  et  oriuntur" 
(see  on  I.  Const.,  ij.)  ;  as  archbishop  Thomas 
of  York,  and  Remigius  of  Dorchester,  were  at 
issue  for  years  "  with  reference  to  Lindsey  " 
(Raine,  Fasti  Eborac,  i.  150).  Accordingly, 
the  canon  provides  that  if  such  a  contest  had 
arisen  within  the  thirty  years,  or  should  there- 
after arise,  the  prelate  who  considered  him- 
self wronged  might  appeal  to  the  provincial 
synod.  If  he  should  be  aggrieved  at  the  de- 
cision of  his  metropolitan  jn  synod,  he  might 


apply  for  redress  to  the  eparch  (or  prefect,  a 
substitute  for  exarch)  of  the  "  diocese,"  or  to 
the  see  of  Constantinople  (in  the  manner  pro- 
vided by  canon  ix.).  It  is  curious  "that  in 
Russia  all  the  sees  are  divided  into  eparchies 
of  the  first,  second,  and  third  class  "  (Neale, 
Essays  on  IAturgiology,  p.  302). 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 
XVI.,  Qusest.  iii.,  can.  j.,  in  Isidore  Mercator's 
version.1 


CANON  XVIII. 

The  crime  of  conspiracy  or  banding  together  is  utterly  prohibited  even  by  the  secu- 
lar law,  and  much  more  ought  it  to  be  forbidden  in  the  Church  of  God.  Therefore,  if 
any,  whether  clergymen  or  monks,  should  be  detected  in  conspiring  or  banding  together, 
or  hatching  plots  against  their  bishops  or  fellow-clergy,  they  shall  by  all  means  be  de- 
posed from  their  own  rank. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XVIII. 

Clerics  and  Monks,  if  they  shall  have  dared  to 
hold  conventicles  and  to  conspire  against  the 
bishop,  shall  be  cast  out  of  their  rank. 

Bright. 

In  order  to  appreciate  this  canon,  we  must 
consider  the  case  of  Ibas  bishop  of  Edessa. 
He  had  been  attached  to  the  Nestorians,  but 
after  the  reunion  between  Cyril  and  John  of 
Antioch  had  re-entered  into  communion  with 
Cyril  on  the  ground  that  Cyril  had  explained 
his  anathemas  (Mansi,  vii.,  240),  or,  as  he 
wrote  to  Maris  (in  a  letter  famous  as  one  of 
the  "Three  Chapters")  that  God  had  "soft- 
ened the  Egyptian's  heart "  (ib.,  248).  Four 
of  his  priests  (Samuel,  Cyrus,  Maras,  and  Eu- 
legius),  stimulated,  says  Fleury  (xxvij.  19)  by 
Uranius  bishop  of  Himeria,  accused  Ibas  of 
Nestorianism  before  his  patriarch  Domnus  of 
Antioch,  who  held  a  synod,  but,  as  Samuel  and 
Cyrus  failed  to  appear,  pronounced  them  de- 
faulters and  set  aside  the  case  (Mansi,  vii.,  217). 
They  went  up  to  Constantinople,  and  per- 
suaded Theodosius  and  archbishop  Flavian 
to  appoint  a  commission  for  inquiring  into 
the  matter.  Two  sessions,  so  to  speak,  were 
held  by  the  three  prelates  thus  appointed,  one 
at  Berytus  the  other  at  Tyre.  At  Berytus, 
according  to  the  extant  minutes  (Mansi,  vii., 
212  ff.),  five  new  accusers  joined  the  original 


four,  and  charges  were  brought  which  affected 
the  moral  character  of  Ibas  as  well  as  his  or- 
thodoxy. The  charge  of  having  used  a  "  blas- 
phemous "  speech  implying  that  Christ  was 
but  a  man  deified,  was  rebutted  by  a  state- 
ment signed  by  some  sixty  clerics  of  Edessa, 
who  according  to  the  accusers,  had  been 
present  when  Ibas  uttered  it.  At  Tyre  the 
episcopal  judges  succeeded  in  making  peace, 
and  accusers  and  accused  partook  of  the  com- 
munion together  (ib.,  vii.,  209).  The  sequence 
of  these  proceedings  cannot  be  thoroughly 
ascertained,  butHefele  (sect.  169)  agrees  with 
Tillemont  (xv.,  474  et  scqq.)  in  dating  the  trial 
at  Berytus  slightly  earlier  than  that  at  Tyre, 
and  assigning  both  to  the  February  of  448  or 
449.  Fleury  inverts  this  order,  and  thinks 
that,  "notwithstanding  the  reconciliation"  at 
Tyre,  the  four  accusers  renewed  their  prose- 
cution of  Ibas  (xxvij.  20)  ;  but  he  has  to  sup- 
pose two  applications  on  their  part  to  Theo- 
dosius and  Flavian,  which  seems  improbable. 
"  The  Council  is  believed,"  says  Tillemont 
(xv.,  698),  "  to  have  had  this  case  in  mind  when 
drawing  up  the  present  canon  : "  and  one  can 
hardly  help  thinking  that,  on  a  spot  within 
sight  of  Constantinople,  they  must  have  re- 
called the  protracted  sufferings  which  malig- 
nant plotters  had  inflicted  on  St.  Chrysostom. 

This  canon  is  found  in  part  in  the  Corpus 
Juris  Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  II., 
Causa  XL,  Qupest.  I.,  canons  xxj.  and  xxiij, 


1  liefele  does  not  give  this  reference,  and  Van  Espen  gives  it  incorrectly  as  causa  sis.  instead  of  xvi. 


282- 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


CANON  XIX. 

Wheeeas  it  lias  come  to  our  ears  that  in  the  provinces  the  Canonical  Synods  of 
Bishops  are  not  held,  and  that  on  this  account  many  ecclesiastical  matters  which  need 
reformation  are  neglected  ;  therefore,  according  to  the  canons  of  the  holy  Fathers,  the 
holy  Synod  decrees  that  the  bishops  of  every  province  shall  twice  in  the  year  assemble 
together  where  the  bishop  of  the  Metropolis  shall  approve,  and  shall  then  settle  what- 
ever matters  may  have  arisen.  And  bishops,  who  do  not  attend,  but  remain  in  their 
oavu  cities,  though  they  are  in  good  health  and  free  from  any  unavoidable  and  necessary 
business,  shall  receive  a  brotherly  admonition. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XIX. 
Twice  each  year  the  Synod  shall  be  held  where- 
ever  the  bishop  of  the  Metropolis  shall  designate, 
and  all  matters  of  pressing  interest  shall  be  de- 
termined. 

See  notes  on  Canon  V.  of  Nice,  and  on 
Canon  XX.  of  Antioch,  and  compare  canon 
VIII.  of  the  council  in  Trullo. 

Bright. 
Hilary  of  Aries  and  his  suffragans,  assem- 


bled at  Eiez,  had  already,  in  439  qualified  the 
provision  for  two  by  adding  significantly  "  if 
the  times  are  quiet "  (Mansi,  v.,  1194).  The 
words  were  written  at  the  close  of  ten  years' 
Avar,  during  which  the  Visigoths  of  Septimania 
"were  endeavouring  to  take  Aries  and  Nar- 
boime  "  (Hodgkin,  Italy  and  her  Invaders,  ii., 
121). 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
XVIII.,  canon  vj. 


CANON  XX. 

It  shall  not  be  lawful,  as  we  have  already  decreed,  for  clergymen  officiating  in  one 
church  to  be  appointed  to  the  church  of  another  city,  but  they  shall  cleave  to  that  in 
which  they  were  first  thought  worthy  to  minister ;  those,  however,  being  excepted,  who 
have  been  driven  by  necessity  from  their  own  country,  and  have  therefore  removed  to 
another  church.  And  if,  after  this  decree,  any  bishop  shall  receive  a  clergyman  belong- 
ing to  another  bishop,  it  is  decreed  that  both  the  received  and  the  receiver  shall  be 
excommunicated  until  such  time  as  the  clergyman  who  has  removed  shall  have  returned 
to  his  own  church. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XX. 

A  clergyman  of  one  city  shall  not  be  given 
a  cure  in  another.  But  if  he  has  been  driven 
from  his  native  place  and  shall  go  into  another 
he  shall  be  without  blame.  If  any  bishop  receives 
clergymen  from  without  his  diocese  he  shall  be 
excommunicated  as  well  as  the  cleric  he  receives. 

It  is  quite  doubtful  as  to  what  "  excommu- 
nication" means  in  this  canon,  probably  not 
anathematism  (so  think  the  commentators) 
but  separation  from  the  communion  of  the 
other  bishops,  and  suspension  from  the  per- 
formance of  clerical  functions. 

Bright. 

This  canon  is  the  third  of  those  which  were 
originally  proposed  by  Martian  in  the  end  of 
the  sixth  session,  as  certain  articles  for  which 


synodical  sanction  was  desirable  (see  above 
Canons  iij.  and  iv.).  It  was  after  they  had 
been  delivered  by  the  Emperor's  own  hand  to 
Anatolius  of  Constantinople  that  the  Council 
broke  out  into  plaudits,  one  of  which  is  suffi- 
ciently startling,  tw  Upei,  t<2  /?ao-iAeT  (Mansi, 
vii.,  177).  The  imperial  draft  is  in  this  case 
very  slightly  altered.  A  reference  is  made 
to  a  previous  determination  (i.e.,  canon  x.) 
against  clerical  pluralities,  and  it  is  ordered 
that  "clerics  registered  as  belonging  to  one 
church  shall  not  be  ranked  as  belonging  to 
the  church  of  another  city,  but  must  be  con- 
tent with  the  one  in  which  they  were  origi- 
nally admitted  to  minister,  excepting  those 
who,  having  lost  their  own  country,  have  been 
compelled  to  migrate  to  another  church," — 
an  exception  intelligible  enough  at  such  a 
period.  Eleven  years  before,  the  Vandal 
Gaiseric  had   expelled  the   Catholic  bishops 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


283 


and  priests  of  Western  Africa  from  their 
churches  :  Quodvultdeus,  bishop  of  Carthage 
with  many  of  his  clergy,  had  been  "  placed  on 
board  some  unseaworthy  vessels,"  and  yet, 
"by  the  Divine  mercy,  had  been  carried  safe 
to  Naples  "  (Vict.  Vitens.,  De  Persec.  Vandal., 
i.,  5  :  he  mentions  other  bishops  as  driven  into 
exile).  Somewhat  later,  the  surge  of  the 
Hunnish  invasion  had  frightened  the  bishop 
of  Sirmium  into  sending  his  church  vessels 
to  Attila's  Gaulish  secretary*  and  had  swept 
onward  in  447  to  within  a  short  distance  of 
the  "New  Rome"  (Hodgkin,  Italy  and  her 
Invaders,  ii.,  54-56).  And  the  very  year  of 
the  Council  was  the  most  momentous  in  the 


whole  history  of  the  "  Barbaric  "  movement. 
The  bishops  who  assembled  in  October  at 
Chalcedon  must  have  heard  by  that  time  of 
the  massacre  of  the  Metz  clergy  on  Easter 
Eve,  of  a  bishop  of  Rkeims  slain  at  his  own 
altar,  of  the  deliverance  of  Orleans  at  the 
prayer  of  St.  Anianus,  of  "  the  supreme  bat- 
tle "  in  the  plain  of  Chalons,  which  turned 
back  Attila  and  rescued  Christian  Gaul 
(Hodgkin,  ii.,  129-152  ;  Kitchin,  Hist.  France, 
i.  61). 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
lxxi.,  c.  iv. 


CANON  XXI. 

Clergymen  and  laymen  bringing  charges  against  bishops  or  clergymen  are  not  to 
be  received  loosely  and  without  examination,  as  accusers,  but  their  own  character  shall 
first  be  investigated. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXI. 

A  cleric  or  layman  making  charges  rashly 
against  Ms  bishop  shall  not  he  received. 


Compare  with  this  canon  the  Vlth  Canon 


of  those  credited  to  the  First  Sj-nod  at  Con- 
stantinople, the  second  ecumenical. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 
II.,  Quest.  VII,  canon  xlix.,  in  Isidore's 
first  version. 


CANON  XXII. 

It  is  not  lawful  for  clergymen,  after  the  death  of  their  bishop,  to  seize  what  belongs 
to  him,  as  has  been  forbidden  also  by  the  ancient  canons ;  and  those  who  do  so  shall 
be  in  danger  of  degradation  from  their  own  rank. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XXII. 
Wlioever  seizes   the  goods   of  his   deceased 
bishop  shall  be  cast  forth  from  his  ranlc. 

It  is  curious  that  the  Greek  text  which 
Zonaras  and  Balsamon  produce,  and  which 
Hervetus  translated,  had  instead  of  tois  7raAcu 
Kavoai,  tois  TTapa\ajj.f3dvov(TLv.  Van  Espen  thinks 
that  the  Greek  commentators  have  tried  with- 
out success  to  attach  any  meaning  to  these 


words,  accepting  the  arguments  of  Bp.  Bev- 
eridge  (which  see).  The  reading  adopted  in 
the  text  does  not  lack  MS.  authority,  and  is 
the  one  printed  by  Justellus  in  his  "Codex 
of  the  Canons  of  the  Universal  Church." 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 
XII.,  Quest.  II.,  canon  xliii.,  in  Isidore's  ver- 
sion. 


CANON  XXIII. 

It  has  come  to  the  hearing  of  the  holy  Synod  that  certain  clergymen  and  monks, 
having  no  authority  from  their  own  bishop,  and  sometimes,  indeed,  while  under  sentence 
of  excommunication  by  him,  betake  themselves  to  the  imperial  Constantinople,  and 
remain  there  for  a  long  time,  raising  disturbances  and  troubling  the  ecclesiastical  state, 


284 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


and  turning  men's  houses  upside  down.  Therefore  the  holy  Synod  has  determined  that 
such  persons  be  first  notified  by  the  Advocate  of  the  most  holy  Church  of  Constanti- 
nople to  depart  from  the  imperial  city ;  and  if  they  shall  shamelessly  continue  in  the 
same  practices,  that  they  shall  be  expelled  by  the  same  Advocate  even  against  their 
will,  and  return  to  their  own  places. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXIII. 
Clerics  or  monks  who  spend  much   time  at 
Constantinople   contrary  to   the  will   of   their 
bishop,  and  stir  up  seditions,  shall  be  cast  out 
of  the  city.1 


This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 
XVI.,  Qusest.  I.,  canon  xvij.,  but  with  the  last 
part  epitomized,  as  the  Boman  correctors 
point  out. 


CANON  XXIV. 

Monasteries,  which  have  once  been  consecrated  with  the  consent  of  the  bishop,  shall 
remain  monasteries  for  ever,  and  the  property  belonging  to  them  shall  be  preserved, 
and  they  shall  never  again  become  secular  dwellings.  And  they  who  shall  permit  this 
to  be  done  shall  be  liable  to  ecclesiastical  penalties. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXIV. 


A  monastery  erected  with  the  consent  of  the 
bishop  shall  be  immovable.  And  whatever  per- 
tains to  it  shall  not  be  alienated.  Whoever  shall 
take  upon  Mm  to  do  otherwise,  shall  not  be  held 
guiltless. 

Joseph  iEgyptius,  in  turning  this  into 
Arabic,  reads:  "And  whoever  shall  turn  any 
monastery  into  a  dwelling  house  for  himself 
.  .  .  let  him  be  cursed  and  anathema." 
The  curious  reader  is  referred  on  this  whole 
subject  to  Sir  Henry  Spelman's  History  and 
Fate  of  Sacrilege,  or  to  the  more  handy  book 
on  the  subject  by  James  Wayland  Joyce,  The 
Doom  of  Sacrilege.2 

Bright. 

The  secularization  of  monasteries  was  an 
evil  which  grew  with  their  wealth  and  influ- 
ence. At  a  Council  held  by  the  patriarch 
Photius  in  the  Apostles'  church  at  Constanti- 
nople, it  is  complained  that  some  persons  at- 
tach the  name  of  "  monastery  "  to  property  of 
their  own,  and  while  professing  to  dedicate  it 
to  God,  write  themselves  down  as  lords  of 


what  has  been  thus  consecrated,  and  are  not 
ashamed  to  claim  after  such  consecration  the 
same  power  over  it  which  they  had  before. 
In  the  West,  we  find  this  abuse  attracting  the 
attention  of  Gregory  the  Great,  who  writes  to 
a  bishop  that  "  rationalis  ordo "  would  not 
allow  a  layman  to  pervert  a  monastic  founda- 
tion at  will  to  his  own  uses  (Epist.  viii.,  31). 
In  ancient  Scotland,  the  occasional  dispersion 
of  religious  communities,  and,  still  more,  the 
clan-principle  which  assigned  chieftain-rights 
over  monasteries  to  the  descendants  of  the 
founder,  left  at  Dunkeld,  Brechin,  Abemethy, 
and  elsewhere,  "  nothing  but  the  mere  name 
of  abbacy  applied  to  the  lands,  and  of  abbot 
borne  by  the  secular  lord  for  the  time" 
(Skene's  Celtic  Scotland,  ii.,  365  ;  cf  Anderson's 
Scotland  in  Early  Christian  Times,  p.  235). 
So,  after  the  great  Irish  monastery  of  Bangor 
in  Down  was  destroyed  by  the  Northmen, 
"non  defuit,"  says  St.  Bernard,  "qui  illud 
teneret  cum  possessionibus  suis  ;  nam  et  con- 
stituebantnr  per  electionem  etiam,  et  abbates 
appellabantur,  servantes  nomine,  etsi  non  re, 
quod  olim  exstiterat "  (Be  Vita  S.  Malachice, 
vj.).  So  in  1188  Giraldus  Cambrensis  found 
a  lay  abbot  in  possession  of  the  venerable 
church  of  Llanbadarn  Vawr  ;  a  "  bad  custom," 


1  "  The  City,"  that  is  to  say  Constantinople. 

2  The  reader  may  like  to  see  the  vow  on  this  subject  taken  by 
King  Charles  I.  of  England,  and  which  was  made  public  by  Arch- 
bishop Sheldon  after  the  Eestoration.    The  vow  is  as  follows  : 

"I  do  here  promise  and  solemnly  vow,  in  the  presence  and  ser- 
vice of  Almighty  God,  that  if  it  shall  please  the  Divine  Majesty  of 
his  infinite  goodness  to  restore  me  to  my  just  kingly  rights,  and 
to  re-establish  me  in  my  throne,  I  will  wholly  give  back  to  his 
Church  all  those  impropriations  which  are  now  held  by  the  Crown; 
and  y  hat  lands  soever  I  do  now  or  should  enjoy,  which  have  been 


taken  away  either  from  any  episcopal  see  or  any  cathedral  or 
collegiate  church,  from  any  abbey  or  other  religious  house,  I 
likewise  promise  for  hereafter  to  hold  them  from  the  Church  un- 
der such  reasonable  fines  and  rents  as  shall  be  set  down  by  some 
conscientious  persons,  whom  I  propose  to  choose  with  all  up- 
rightness of  heart  to  direct  me  in  this  particular.  And  I  humbly 
beseech  God  to  accept  of  this  my  vow,  and  to  bless  me  in  the  de- 
sign I  have  now  in  hand  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord. 

"Charles  E. 
"  Oxford,  April  13, 1646." 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


285 


he  says,  "had  grown  up,  whereby  powerful 
laymen,  at  first  chosen  by  the  clergy  to  be 
"ceconomi"  or  "patroni  et  defensores,"  had 
usurped  "  totuni  jus,"  appropriated  the  lands, 
and  left  to  the  clergy  nothing  but  the  altars, 
with  tithes  and  offerings  (Itin.  Comb.,  ii.,  4). 
This  abuse  must  be  distinguished  from  the 
corrupt  device  whereby,  in  Bede's  later  years, 
Northumbrian  nobles  contrived  to  gain  for 
their  estates  the  immunities  of  abbey-lands 


by  professing  to  found  monasteries,  which 
they  filled  with  disorderly  monks,  who  lived 
there  in  contempt  of  all  rule  (Bede,  Ep.  to  Eg- 
bert, vij.).  In  the  year  of  his  birth,  the  first 
English  synod  had  forbidden  bishops  to  de- 
spoil consecrated  monasteries  (Bede,  iv.,  5). 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 
XIX.,  Qusest.  III.,  canon  iv. 


CANON  XXV. 

Forasmuch  as  certain  of  the  metropolitans,  as  we  have  heard,  neglect  the  flocks  com- 
mitted to  them,  and  delay  the  ordinations  of  bishops  the  holy  Synod  has  decided  that 
the  ordinations  of  bishops  shall  take  place  within  three  months,  unless  an  inevitable 
necessity  should  some  time  require  the  term  of  delay  to  be  prolonged.  And  if  he  shall 
not  do  this,  he  shall  be  liable  to  ecclesiastical  penalties,  and  the  income  of  the  widowed 
church  shall  be  kept  safe  by  the  steward  of  the  same  Church. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXV. 


Let  the  ordination  of  bishops  be  within  three 
months :  necessity  however  may  make  the  time 
longer.  But  if  anyone  shall  ordain  counter  to 
this  decree,  he  shall  be  liable  to  punishment.  The 
revenue  shall  remain  with  the  ceconomus. 

Bright. 

The  "  Steward  of  the  Church  "  was  to  "  take 
care  of  the  revenues  of  the  church  widowed  " 
by  the  death  of  its  bishop,  who  was  regarded 
as  representing  Him  to  whom  the  whole 
Church  was  espoused  (see  Eph.  v.  23  ff.).  So 
in  the  "  order  of  the  holy  and  great  church  " 
of  St.  Sophia,  the  "  Great  Steward  is  described 
as  "  taking  the  oversight  of  the  widowed 
church  "  (Goar,  Eucholog.,  p.  269) ;  so  Hincmar 
says:    "Si  fuerit   defunctus   episeopus,   ego 


.  .  .  visitatorem  ipsi  viduatse  designabo 
ecclesise  ; "  and  the  phrase,  "  viduata  per 
mortem  N.  nuper  episcopi "  became  common 
in  the  West  (F.  G.  Lee,  Validity  of  English  Or- 
ders, p.  373).  The  episcopal  ring  was  a  symbol 
of  the  same  idea.  So  at  St.  Chrysostom's  resto- 
ration Eudoxia  claimed  to  have  ' '  given  back 
the  bridegroom  "  (Serm.  post  redit.,  iv.).  So 
Bishop  Wilson  told  Queen  Caroline  that  he 
"would  not  leave  his  wife  in  his  old  age  because 
she  was  poor"  (Keble's  Life  of  Wilson,  ii.,  767) ; 
and  Peter  Mongus,  having  invaded  the  Alex- 
andrian see  while  its  legitimate  occupant, 
Timothy  Salophaciolus,  was  alive,  was  expelled 
as  an  "adulterer"  (Liberatus,  Breviar.,  xviij.). 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
LXXV,  C.  ij.1 


CANON  XXVI. 

Forasmuch  as  we  have  heard  that  in  certain  churches  the  bishops  managed  the  church- 
business  without  stewards,  it  has  seemed  good  that  every  church  having  a  bishop  shall 
have  also  a  steward  from  among  its  own  clergy,  who  shall  manage  the  church  business 
under  the  sanction  of  his  own  bishop  ;  that  so  the  administration  of  the  church  may  not 
be  without  a  witness ;  and  that  thus  the  goods  of  the  church  may  not  be  squandered,  nor 
reproach  be  brought  upon  the  priesthood;  and  if  he  [i.e.,  the  Bishop]  will  not  do  this, 
he  shall  be  subjected  to  the  divine  canons. 


NOTES. 
Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXVI. 
The  (Economics in  all  churches  must  be  chosen 
from  the  clergy.     And  the   bishop  ivho  neglects 
to  do  this  is  not  without  blame. 


Bright. 
As  the  stream  of  offerings  became  fuller, 
the  work   of  dispensing  them  became  more 
complex,    until  the    archdeacons    could  no 


1 1  think  this  is  the  first  time  I  have  ever  noticed  Van  Espen  to  have  omitted  giving  the  reference. 


286 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


longer  find  time  for  it,  and  it  was  committed 
to  a  special  officer  called  "ceconomus"  or 
steward  (Bingham,  iii.,  12, 1 ;  Transl.  of  Fleury, 
iii.,  120).  So  the  Council  of  Gangra,  in  the 
middle  of  the  fourth  century,  forbids  the 
church  offerings  to  be  disposed  of  without 
consent  of  the  bishop  or  of  the  person  ap- 
pointed, ek  oiKovofxiav  eu7rouas  (canon  viij.) ;  and 
St.  Basil  mentions  the  oeconomi  of  his  own 
church  (Epist.,  xxiij.  1),  and  the  "rafilat  of  the 
sacred  goods"  of  his  brother's  at  Nyssa  (ib., 
225).  And  although  Gregory  Nazianzen  took 
credit  to  himself  for  declining  to  appoint  a 
"  stranger"  to  make  an  estimate  of  the  property 
which  of  right  belonged  to  the  church  of  Con- 
stantinople, and  in  fact,  with  a  strange  confu- 
sion between  personal  and  official  obligations, 
gave  the  go-by  to  the  whole  question  (Carm. 
de  Vita  sua,  1479  ff.),  his  successor,  Nectarius, 
being  a  man  of  business,  took  care  to  appoint 
a  "  church-steward  "  ;  and  Chrysostom,  on 
coming  to  the  see,  examined  his  accounts,  and 
found  much  superfluous  expenditure  (Palla- 
dius,  Dial,  p.  19).  Theophilus  of  Alexandria 
compelled  two  of  the  Tall  Brothers  to  under- 
take the  oiKovofiLa  of  the  Alexandrian  church 
(Soc,  vi.,  7) ;  and  in  one  of  his  extant  directions 
observes  that  the  clergy  of  Lyco  wish  for  an- 
other "ceconomus,"  and  that  the  bishop  has 
consented,  in  order  that  the  church-funds 
may  be  properly  spent  (Mansi,  iii.,  1257).  At 
Hippo  St.  Augustine  had  a  "prsepositus 
domus  "  who  acted  as  Church-steward  (Possi- 
dius,  Vit.  August.,  xxiv.).  Isidore  of  Pelusium 
denounces  Martinianus  as  a  fraudulent  "ceco- 
nomus," and  requests  Cyril  to  appoint  an  up- 
right one  (E2)ist.  ii.,  127),  and  in  another  letter 
urges  him  to  put  a  stop  to  the  dishonest  greed 
of  those  who  acted  as  stewards  of  the  same 
church  (ib.,  v.  79).  The  records  of  the  Council 
of  Ephesus  mention  the  "  ceconomus  "  of  Con- 
stantinople, the  "  ceconomus "  of  Ephesus 
(Mansi,  iv.,  1228-1398),  and,  the  "  ceconomus  " 
of  Philadelphia.  According  to  an  extant  letter 
of  Cyril,  the  "  oeconomi  "  of  Perrha  in  Syria 
were  mistrusted  by  the  clergy,  who  wished  to 
get  rid  of  them  "  and  appoint  others  by  their 
own  authority  "  (ib.,  vii.,  321).  Ibas  of  Edessa 
had  been  complained  of  for  his  administra- 
tion of  church  property  ;  he  was  accused,  e.g., 
of  secreting  a  jewelled  chalice,  and  bestowing 
the  church  revenues,  and  gold  and  silver 
crosses,  on  his  brother  and  cousins  ;  he  ulti- 
mately undertook  to  appoint  "oeconomi" 
after  the  model  of  Antioch  (Mansi,  vii.,  201). 
Proterius,  afterwards  patriarch  of  Alexandria 
and  a  martyr  for  Chalcedonian  orthodoxy,  was 
"  ceconomus  "  under  Dioscorus  (ib.,  iv.,  1017), 
as  was  John  Talaia,  a  man  accused  of  bribery, 
under  his  successor  (Evag.,  iii.,  12).     There 


may  have  been  many  cases  in  which  there  was 
no  "  ceconomus,"  or  in  which  the  management 
was  in  the  hands  of  private  agents  of  the 
bishop,  in  whom  the  Church  could  put  no 
confidence  ;  and  the  Council,  having  alluded 
to  the  office  of  "ceconomus"  in  canons  ij.  and 
xxv.,  now  observes  that  some  bishops  had 
been  managing  their  church  property  with- 
out "oeconomi,"  and  thereupon  resolves  "that 
every  church  which  has  a  bishop  shall  also 
have  an  ceconomus "  from  among  its  own 
clergy,  to  administer  the  property  of  the 
church  under  the  direction  of  its  own  bishop  ; 
so  that  the  administration  of  the  church 
property  may  not  be  unattested,  and  thereby 
waste  ensue,  and  the  episcopate  incur  re- 
proach." Any  bishop  who  should  neglect  to 
appoint  such  an  officer  should  be  punishable 
under  "the  divine"  (or  sacred)  "canons." 

Nearly  three  years  after  the  Council,  Leo 
saw  reason  for  requesting  Marcian  not  to 
allow  civil  judges,  "  novo  exemplo,"  to  audit 
the  accounts  of  "the  oeconomi  of  the  church 
of  Constantinople,"  which  ought,  "  secundum 
traditum  morem,"  to  be  examined  by  the 
bishop  alone  (Epist.  cxxxvij.  2).  In  after  days 
the  "  great  steward  "  of  St.  Sophia  was  always 
a  deacon  ;  he  was  a  conspicuous  figure  at  the 
Patriarch's  celebrations,  standing  on  the 
right  of  the  altar,  vested  in  alb  and  stole,  and 
holding  the  sacred  fan  (pnr[8iov)  ;  his  duty  was 
to  enter  all  incomings  and  outgoings  of  the 
church's  revenue  in  a  charterlary,  and  exhibit 
it  quarterly,  or  half  yearly,  to  the  patriarchs  ; 
and  he  governed  the  church  during  a  vacancy 
of  the  see  (Eucholog.,  pp.  268,  275).  In  the 
West,  Isidore  of  Seville  describes  the  duties 
of  the  "  ceconomus  "  ;  he  has  to  see  to  the  re- 
pair and  building  of  churches,  the  care  of 
church  lands,  the  cultivation  of  vineyards,  the 
payment  of  clerical  stipends,  of  doles  to  the 
widows  and  the  poor,  and  of  food  and  clothing 
to  church  servants,  and  even  the  carrying  on  of 
church  law  suits, — all  "cum  jussu  et  arbitrio 
sui  episcopi"  (Ep.  to  Leudefred,  Op.  ii.,  520) ; 
and  before  Isidore's  death  the  IVth  Council 
of  Toledo  refers  to  this  canon,  and  orders  the 
bishops  to  appoint  "from  their  own  clergy 
those  whom  the  Greeks  call  oeconomi,  hoc  est, 
qui  vici  episcoporum  res  ecclesiasticas  tractant 
(canon  xlviij.,  Mansi,  x.,  631).  There  was  an  of- 
ficer named  "ceconomus  "  in  the  old  Irish  mon- 
asteries ;  see  Reeves'  edition  of  Adamnan,p.  47. 

This  Canon  is  found  twice  in  the  Corpus 
Juris  Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  II., 
Causa  XVI.,  Q.  VII.,  Canon  xxi.,  and  again 
in  Pars  I.,  Dist.  LXXXIX.,  c.  iv.1 

1  It  is  curious  that  both  the  French  and  English  translations  of 
Hefele  give  this  reference  incorrectly,  and  each  makes  the  same 
error,  giving  Dist.  lxsix.  instead  of  lxsxis. 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


287 


CANON  XXVII. 

The  holy  Synod  has  decreed  that  those  who  forcibly  carry  off  women  under  pretence 
of  marriage,  and  the  aiders  or  abettors  of  such  ravishers,  shall  be  degraded  if  clergy- 
men, and  if  laymen  be  anathematized. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXVII. 
If  a  clergyman  elope  with  a  woman,  let  him 
be  expelled  from  the  Church.     If  a  layman,  let 
him  be  anathema.     The  same  shall  be  the  lot  of 
any  that  assist  him. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 
XXXVL,  Q.  II.,  canon  j. 


NOTES. 
In 


many  old  collections  this  is  the  last 
canon  of  this  Council,  e.g.,  Dionysius  Ex- 
iguus,  Isidore,  the  Prisca,  the  Greek  by  John 
of  Antioch,  and  the  Arabic  by  Joseph  iEgyp- 
tius.  The  reader  familiar  Avith  the  subject 
will  have  but  little  difficulty  in  explaining 
to  his  own  satisfaction  the  omission  of  canon 
xxviij.  in  these  instances. 


CANON  XXVIII. 

Following  in  all  things  the  decisions  of  the  holy  Fathers,  and  acknowledging  the 
canon,  which  has  been  just  read,  of  the  One  Hundred  and  Fifty  Bishops  beloved-of- 
God  (who  assembled  in  the  imperial  city  of  Constantinople,  which  is  New  Rome,  in  the 
time  of  the  Emperor  Theodosius  of  happy  memory),  we  also  do  enact  and  decree  the 
same  things  concerning  the  privileges  of  the  most  holy  Church  of  Constantinople,  which 
is  New  Home.  For  the  Fathers  rightly  granted  privileges  to  the  throne  of  old  Rome, 
because  it  was  the  royal  city.  And  the  One  Hundred  and  Fifty  most  religious  Bishops, 
actuated  by  the  same  consideration,  gave  equal  privileges  (i<ra  Trpecrfieia)  to  the  most 
holy  throne  of  New  Borne,  justly  judging  that  the  city  which  is  honoured  with  the 
Sovereignty  and  the  Senate,  and  enjoys  equal  privileges  with  the  old  imperial  Rome, 
should  in  ecclesiastical  matters  also  be  magnified  as  she  is,  and  rank  next  after  her ;  so 
that,  in  the  Pontic,  the  Asian,  and  the  Thracian  dioceses,  the  metropolitans  only  and 
such  bishops  also  of  the  Dioceses  aforesaid  as  are  among  the  barbarians,  should  be 
ordained  by  the  aforesaid  most  holy  throne  of  the  most  holy  Church  of  Constantinople; 
every  metropolitan  of  the  aforesaid  dioceses,  together  with  the  bishops  of  his  province, 
ordaining  his  own  provincial  bishops,  as  has  been  declared  by  the  divine  canons ;  but 
that,  as  has  been  above  said,  the  metropolitans  of  the  aforesaid  Dioceses  should  be 
ordained  by  the  archbishop  of  Constantinople,  after  the  proper  elections  have  been 
held  according  to  custom  and  have  been  reported  to  him. 


NOTE. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXVIII. 


The  bishop  of  New  Borne  shall  enjoy  the  same 
honour  as  the  bishop  of  Old  Borne,  on  account 
of  the  removal  of  the  Empire.  For  this  reason 
the  [metropolitans]  of  Pontics,  of  Asia,  and  of 
Thrace,  as  tvell  as  the  Barbarian  bishopjs  shall 
be  ordained  by  the  bishop  of  Constantinople. 

Van  Espen. 

It  is  certain  that  this  canon  was  expressly 
renewed  by  canon  xxxvi.  of  the  Council  of 
Trullo  and  from  that  time  has  been  num- 
bered by  the  Greeks  among  the  canons  ;  and 
at  last  it  was  acknowledged  by  some  Latin 
collectors  also,  and  was  placed  by  Gratian  in 


his  Decretum,  although  clearly  with  a  different 
sense.     (Pars  I.,  Dist.  xxii.,  C.  vj.) 

Bright. 
Here  is  a  great  addition  to  the  canon  of 
381,  so  ingeniously  linked  on  to  it  as  to  seem 
at  first  sigfit  a  part  of  it.  The  words  /cat  (We 
are  meant  to  suggest  that  what  follows  is  in 
fact  involved  in  what  has  preceded  :  whereas 
a  new  point  of  departure  is  here  taken,  and 
instead  of  a  mere  "  honorary  pre-eminence  " 
the  bishop  of  Constantinople  acquires  a  vast 
jurisdiction,  the  independent  authority  of 
three  exarchs  being  annulled  in  order  to 
make  him  patriarch.  Previously  he  had 
TT-poeSpiu  now  he  gains  Trpoaraaia,     As  we  have 


288 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


seen,  a  series  of  aggrandizements  in  fact  had 
prepared  for  this  aggrandizement  in  law ; 
and  various  metropolitans  of  Asia  Minor 
expressed  their  contentment  at  seeing  it 
effected.  "It  is,  indeed,  more  than  probable 
that  the  self-assertion  of  Rome  excited  the 
jealousy  of  her  rival  of  the  East,"  and  thus 
"Eastern  bishops  secretly  felt  that  the  cause 
of  Constantinople  was  theirs "  (Gore's  Leo 
the  Great,  p.  120) ;  but  the  gratification  of 
Constantinople  ambition  was  not  the  less,  in 
a  canonical  sense,  a  novelty,  and  the  attempt 
to  enfold  it  in  the  authority  of  the  Council  of 
381  was  rather  astute  than  candid.  The  true 
plea,  whatever  might  be  its  value,  was  that 
the  Council  had  to  deal  with  a  fait  accompli, 
which  it  was  wise  at  once  to  legalize  and  to 
regulate;  that  the  "boundaries  of  the  re- 
spective exarchates  .  .  .  were  ecclesias- 
tical arrangements  made  with  a  view  to  the 
general  good  and  peace  of  the  Church,  and 
liable  to  vary  with  the  dispensations  to  which 
the  Church  was  providentially  subjected,"  so 
that  "  by  confirming  the  ii<  ttoXXov  Kpa-njaav 
e-9os "  in  regard  to  the  ordination  of  certain 
metropolitans  (see  Ep.  of  Council  to  Leo,  Leon. 
Epist.  xcviij.,  4),  "they  were  acting  in  the 
spirit,  while  violating  the  letter,  of  the  ever- 
famous  rule  of  Nicsea,  to.  ap^ua  eSrj  Kpardro 
(cp.  Newman,  Transl.  of  Fleury,  iii.,  407).  It 
is  observable  that  Aristenus1  and  Symeon 
Logothetes  reckon  this  decree  as  a  XXIXth 
canon  (Justellus,  ii.,  694,  720). 

After  the  renewal  of  this  canon  by  the 
Council  of  Trullo,  Gratian  adds  "TheVIIIth 
Synod  held  under  Pope  Hadrian  II.,  canon 
xxj."  (Decretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist.  xxij.,  C.  vij.) 
"  We  define  that  no  secular  power  shall  here- 
after dishonour  anyone  of  these  who  rule  our 
patriarchal  sees,  or  attempt  to  move  them 
from  their  proper  throne,  but  shall  judge 
them  worthy  of  all  reverence  and  honour ; 


chiefly  the  most  holy  Pope  of  Old  Rome,  and 
then  the  Patriarch  of  Constantinople,  and 
then  those  of  Alexandria,  and  Antioch,  and 
Jerusalem." 

Some  Greek  codices  have  the  following 
heading  to  this  canon. 

"  Decree  of  the  same  holy  Synod  published 
on  account  of  the  privileges  of  the  throne  of 
the  most  holy  Church  of  Constantinople." 

Tillemont. 

This  canon  seems  to  recognise  no  particu- 
lar authority  in  the  Church  of  Rome,  save 
what  the  Fathers  had  granted  it,  as  the  seat 
of  the  empire.  And  it  attributes  in  plain 
words  as  much  to  Constantinople  as  to  Rome, 
with  the  exception  of  the  first  place.  Never- 
theless I  do  not  observe  that  the  Popes  took 
up  a  thing  so  injurious  to  their  dignity,  and 
of  so  dangerous  a  consequence  to  the  whole 
Church.  For  what  Lupus  quotes  of  St.  Leo's 
lxxviij.  (civ)  letter,  refers  rather  to  Alex- 
andria and  to  Antioch,  than  to  Rome. 
St.  Leo  is  contented  to  destroy  the  founda- 
tion on  which  they  built  the  elevation  of 
Constantinople,  maintaining  that  a  thing  so 
entirely  ecclesiastical  as  the  episcopate  ought 
not  to  be  regulated  by  the  temporal  dignity 
of  cities,  which,  nevertheless,  has  been  almost 
always  followed  in  the  establishment  of  the 
metropolis,  according  to  the  Council  of  Nicea. 

St.  Leo  also  complains  that  the  Council  of 
Chalcedon  broke  the  decrees  of  the  Council 
of  Nice,  the  practice  of  antiquity,  and  the 
rights  of  Metropolitans.  Certainly  it  was  an 
odious  innovation  to  see  a  Bishop  made  the 
chief,  not  of  one  department  but  of  three ;  for 
which  no  example  could  be  found  save  in  the 
authority  which  the  Popes  took  over  Illyri- 
cum,  where,  however,  they  did  not  claim  the 
power  to  ordain  any  Bishop. 


EXCURSUS  ON  THE  LATER  HISTORY  OF  CANON  XXVIII 

Among  the  bishops  who  gave  their  answers  at  the  last  session  to  the  question  whether 
their  subscription  to  the  canons  was  voluntary  or  forced  was  Eusebius,  bishop  of  Dorylceum, 
an  Asiatic  bishop  who  said  that  he  had  read  the  Constantinopolitan  canon  to  "  the  holy  pope 
of  Rome  in  presence  of  clerics  of  Constantinople,  and  that  he  had  accepted  it"  (L.  and  O, 
Conc.,iv.  815).  But  quite  possibly  this  evidence  is  of  little  value.  But  what  is  more  to  the 
point  is  that  the  Papal  legates  most  probably  had  already  at  this  very  council  recognized  the 
right  of  Constantinople  to  rank  immediately  after  Rome.  For  at  the  very  first  session  when  the 
Acts  of  the  Latrocinium  were  read,  it  was  found  that  to  Flavian,  the  Archbishop  of  Constan- 
tinople, was  given  only  the  fifth  place.     Against  this  the  bishop  protested  and  asked,  "  Why 

»  Such  is  not  the  case  in  Aristenus  as  found  in  Beveridge,  Tom,  I.,  p.  147. 


CHALCEDON.    A.D.  451  289 


did  not  Flavian  receive  his  position?"  and  the  papal  legate  Paschasinus  answered:  "We 
will,  please  God,  recognize  the  present  bishop  Anatolius  of  Constantinople  as  the  first  [i.e. 
after  us],  but  Dioscorus  made  Flavian  the  fifth."  It  would  seem  to  be  in  vain  to  attempt  to 
escape  the  force  of  these  words  by  comparing  with  them  the  statement  made  in  the  last  ses- 
sion, in  a  moment  of  heat  and  iifdignation,  by  Lucentius  the  papal  legate,  that  the  canons  of 
Constantinople  were  not  found  among  those  of  the  Roman  Code.  It  may  well  be  that  this 
statement  was  true,  and  yet  it  does  not  in  any  way  lessen  the  importance  of  the  fact  that  at 
the  first  session  (a  very  different  thing  from  the  sixteenth)  Paschasinus  had  admitted  that 
Constantinople  enjoyed  the  second  place.  It  would  seem  that  Quesnel  has  proved  his  point, 
notwithstanding  the  attempts  of  the  Ballerini  to  counteract  and  overthrow  his  arguments. 

It  would  be  the  height  of  absurdity  for  any  one  to  attempt  to  deny  that  the  canon  of 
Constantinople  was  entirely  in  force  and  practical  execution,  as  far  of  those  most  interested 
were  concerned,  long  before  the  meeting  of  the  council  of  Chalcedon,  and  in  394,  only  thir- 
teen years  after  the  adoption  of  the  canon,  we  find  the  bishop  of  Constantinople  presiding 
at  a  synod  at  which  both  the  bishop  of  Alexandria  and  the  bishop  of  Antioch  were  present. 

St.  Leo  made,  in  connexion  with  this  matter,  some  statements  which  perhaps  need  not  be 
commented  upon,  but  should  certainly  not  be  forgotten.  In  his  epistle  to  Anatolius  (no.  cvi.) 
in  speaking  of  the  third  canon  of  Constantinople  he  says  :  "  That  document  of  certain  bish- 
ops has  never  been  brought  by'j-our  predecessors  to  the  knowledge  of  the  Apostolic  See." 
And  in  writing  to  the  Empress  (Ep.  cv.,  ad  Pulch.)  he  makes  the  following  statement,  strangely 
contrary  to  what  she  at  least  knew  to  be  the  fact,  "  To  this  concession  a  long  course  of  years 
has  given  no  effect !  " 

We  need  not  stop  to  consider  the  question  why  Leo  rejected  the  xxviijth  canon  of  Chal- 
cedon. It  is  certain  that  he  rejected  it  and  those  who  wish  to  see  the  motive  of  this  rejec- 
tion considered  at  length  are  referred  to  Quesnel  and  to  the  Ballerini ;  the  former  affirm- 
ing that  it  was  because  of  its  encroachments  upon  the  prerogatives  of  his  own  see,  the 
latter  urging  that  it  was  only  out  of  his  zeal  for  the  keeping  in  full  force  of  the  Nicene  decree. 

Leo  can  never  be  charged  with  weakness.  His  rejection  of  the  canon  was  absolute  and 
unequivocal.  In  writing  to  the  Emperor  he  says  that  Anatolius  only  got  the  See  of  Constan- 
tinople by  his  consent,  that  he  should  behave  himself  modestly,  and  that  there  is  no  way  he 
can  make  of  Constantinople  "an  Apostolic  See,"  and  adds  that  "  only  from  love  of  peace  and 
for  the  restoration  of  the  unity  of  the  faith  "  he  has  "  abstained  from  annulling  this  ordina- 
tion "  (Ep.  civ.). 

To  the  Empress  he  wrote  with  still  greater  violence :  "  As  for  the  resolution  of  the  bish- 
ops which  is  contrary  to  the  Nicene  decree,  in  union  with  your  faithful  piety,  I  declare  it  to 
be  invalid  and  annul  it  by  the  authority  of  the  holy  Apostle  Peter  "  (Ep.  cv.). 

The  papal  annulling  does  not  appear  to  have  been  of  much  force,  for  Leo  himself  con- 
fesses, in  a  letter  written  about  a  year  later  to  the  Empress  Pulcheria  (Ep.  cxvi.),  that  the 
Illyrian  bishops  had  since  the  council  subscribed  the  xxviiith  canon. 

The  pope  had  taken  occasion  in  his  letter  in  which  he  announced  his  acceptance  of  the 
doctrinal  decrees  of  Chalcedon  to  go  on  further  and  express  his  rejection  of  the  canons. 
This  part  of  the  letter  was  left  unread  throughout  the  Greek  empire,  and  Leo  complains  of 
it  to  Julian  of  Cos  (Ep.  cxxvij.). 

Leo  never  gave  over  his  opposition,  although  the  breach  was  made  up  between  him  and 
Anatolius  by  an  apparently  insincere  letter  on  the  part  of  the  latter  (Ep.  cxxxii.).  Leo's  suc- 
cessors followed  his  example  in  rejecting  the  canons,  both  the  Hid  of  Constantinople  and  the 
XXVIII th  of  Chalcedon,  but  as  M.  l'abbe  Duchesne  so  admirably  says  :  "  Mais  leur  voix  fut 
peu  ecoutee  ;  on  leur  accorda  sans  doute  des  satisfactions,  mais  de  pure  ceremonie."  1    But 

1  Duchesne,  Origines  du  Culte  Chretien,  p.  34. 
VOL.    XIV.  U 


890 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451! 


Justinian  acknowledged  the  Constantinopolitan  and  Clialcedonian  rank  of  Constantinople 
in  his  CXXXIst  Novel,  (cap.  j.),  and  the  Synod  in  Trullo  in  canon  xxxvj.  renewed  exactly 
canon  xxviij.  of  Chalcedon.  Moreover  the  Seventh  Ecumenical  with  the  approval  of  the 
Papal  Legates  gave  a  general  sanction  to  all  the  canons  accepted  by  the  Trullan  Synod.  And 
finally  in  1215  the  Fourth  Council  of  the  Lateran  in  its  Vth  Canon  acknowledged  Constanti- 
nople's rank  as  immediately  after  Rome,  but  this  was  while  Constantinople  was  in  the  hands 
of  the  Latins  !  Subsequently  at  Florence  the  second  rank,  in  accordance  with  the  canons  of 
I.  Constantinople  and  of  Chalcedon  (which  had  been  annulled  by  Leo)  was  given  to  the  Greek 
Patriarch  of  Constantinople,  and  so  the  opposition  of  Rome  gave  Avay  after  seven  centuries 
and  a  half,  and  the  Nicene  Canon  which  Leo  declared  to  be  "inspired  by  the  Holy  Ghost" 
and  "valid  to  the  end  of  time"  {Ep.  cvi.),  was  set  at  nought  by  Leo's  successor  in  the  Apos- 
tolic See. 


From  the  Acts  of  the  same  Holy  Synod  concerning  Photius,  Bishop  of  Tyre,  and 
Eustathius,  Bishop  of  Berytus. 

The  most  magnificent  and  glorious  judges  said  : 

"What  is  determined  by  the  Holy  Synod  [in  the  matter  of  the  Bishops  ordained  by 
the  most  religious  Bishop  Photius,  but  removed  by  the  most  religious  Bishop  Eusta- 
thius and  ordered  to  be  Presbyters  after  (having  held)  the  Episcopate  ]  ? 

The  most  religious  Bishops  Paschasinus  and  Lucentius,  and  the  Priest  Boniface, 
representatives  of  the  Church 1  of  Borne,  said  : 


CANON  XXIX. 

It  is  sacrilege  to  degrade  a  bishop  to  the  rank  of  a  presbyter ;  but,  if  they  are  for 
just  cause  removed  from  episcopal  functions,  neither  ought  they  to  have  the  position  of 
a  Presbyter ;  and  if  they  have  been  displaced  without  any  charge,  they  shall  be  restored 
to  their  episcopal  dignity. 

And  Anatolius,  the  most  reverend  Archbishop  of  Constantinople,  said :  If  those  who 
are  alleged  to  have  been  removed  from  the  episcopal  dignity  to  the  order  of  presbyter, 
have  indeed  been  condemned  for  any  sufficient  causes,  clearly  they  are  not  worthy  of 
the  honour  of  a  presbyter.  But  if  they  have  been  forced  down  into  the  lower  rank 
without  just  cause,  they  are  wortl^,  if  they  appear  guiltless,  to  receive  again  both  the 
dignity  and  priesthood  of  the  Episcopate. 

And  all  the  most  reverend  Bishops  cried  out : 

The  judgment  of  the  Fathers  is  right.  We  all  say  the  same.  The  Fathers  have 
righteously  decided.     Let  the  sentence  of  the  Archbishops  prevail. 

And  the  most  magnificent  and  glorious  judges  said  : 

Let  the  pleasure  of  the  Holy  Synod  be  established  for  all  time. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XXIX. 
He  is  sacrilegious  who  degrades  a  bishop  to 
the  rank  of  a  presbyter.  For  he  that  is  guilty 
of  crime  is  unworthy  of  the  priesthood.  But  he 
that  was  deposed  without  cause,  let  him  be  [still] 
bishop. 

What   precedes   and  follows  the   so-called 


canon  is  abbreviated  from  the  IVth  Session 
of  the  Council  (L.  and  C,  Cone.,  Tom.  IV., 
col.  550).  I  have  followed  a  usual  Greek 
method  of  printing  it. 

Hefele. 
This  so-called  canon  is  nothing  but  a  ver- 
bal copy  of  a  passage  from  the  minutes  of  the 


1  "Apostolic  Chair  of  Iiome"  in  the  Greek  of  the  acts. 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


291 


fourth  session  in  the  matter  of  Photius  of 
Tyre  and  Eustathius  of  Berytus.  Moreover, 
it  does  not  possess  the  peculiar  form  which 
we  find  in  all  the  genuine  canons  of  Chalce- 
don,  and  in  almost  all  ecclesiastical  canons  in 
general ;  on  the  contrary,  there  adheres  to  it 
a  portion  of  the  debate,  of  which  it  is  a  frag- 
ment, in  which  Anatolius  is  introduced  as 
speaking.  Besides  it  is  wanting  in  all  the  old 
Greek,  as  well  as  in  the  Latin  collections  of 
canons,  and  in  those  of  John  of  Antioch  and 


of  Photius,  and  has  only  been  appended  to 
the  twenty-eight  genuine  canons  of  Chalce- 
don  from  the  fact  that  a  later  transcriber 
thought  fit  to  add  to  the  genuine  canons  the 
general  and  important  principle  contained  in 
the  place  in  question  of  the  fourth  session. 
Accordingly,  this  so-called  canon  is  certainly 
an  ecclesiastical  rule  declared  at  Chalcedon, 
and  in  so  far  a  kovwv,  but  it  was  not  added  as 
a  canon  proper  to  the  other  twenty- eight  by 
the  Synod. 


From  the  Fourth  Session  of  the  same  Holy  Synod,  having  reference  to  the  matter  of 
the  Egyptian  Bishops. 

The  most  magnificent  and  glorious  judges,  and  the  whole  Senate,  said  : 


CANON  XXX. 

Since  the  most  religious  bishops  of  Egypt  have  postponed  for  the  present  their  sub- 
scription to  the  letter  of  the  most  holy  Archbishop  Leo,  not  because  they  oppose  the 
Catholic  Faith,  but  because  they  declare  that  it  is  the  custom  in  the  Egyptian  diocese 
to  do  no  such  thing  without  the  consent  and  order  of  their  Archbishop,  and  ask  to  be 
excused  until  the  ordination  of  the  new  bishop  of  the  metropolis  of  Alexandria,  it  has 
seemed  to  us  reasonable  and  kind  that  this  concession  should  be  made  to  them,  they 
remaining  in  their  official  habit  in  the  imperial  city  until  the  Archbishop  of  the  Metropo- 
lis of  Alexandria  shall  have  been  ordained. 

And  the  most  religious  Bishop  Paschasinns,  representative  of  the  Apostolic  throne 
[of  Borne1],  said : 

If  your  authority  suggests  and  commands  that  any  indulgence  be  shewn  to  them,  let 
them  give  securities  that  they  will  not  depart  from  this  city  until  the  city  of  Alexan- 
dria receives  a  Bishop. 

And  the  most  magnificent  and  glorious  judges,  and  the  whole  Senate,  said : 

Let  the  sentence  of  the  most  holy  Paschasinus  be  confirmed. 

And  therefore  let  them  [i.e.,  the  most  religious  Bishops  of  the  Egyptians]  remain  in 
their  official  habit,  either  giving  securities,  if  they  can,  or  being  bound  by  the  obliga- 
tion of  an  oath. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXX. 
It  is  the  custom  of  the  Egyptians  that  none 
subscribe 2  without  the  p>ermission  of  their  Arch- 
bishop. Wherefore  they  are  not  to  be  blamed 
ivlio  did  not  subscribe  the  Epistle  of  the  holy  Leo 
until  an  Archbishop  had  been  appointed  for  them. 

As  in  the  case  of  the  last  so-called  "canon  " 
I  have  followed  a  usual  Creek  method,  the 
wording  departs  but  little  from  that  of  the 
acts  {Vide  L.  and  C,  Cone,  Tom.  IV.,  col. 
517). 

Hefele. 

This  paragraph,  like  the  previous  one,  is  not 


a  proper  canon,  but  a  verbal  repetition  of  a 
proposal  made  in  the  fourth  session  by  the 
imperial  commissioners,  improved  by  the  leg- 
ate Paschasinus,  and  approved  by  the  Synod. 
Moreover,  this  so-called  canon  is  not  found  in 
the  ancient  collections,  and  was  probably 
added  to  the  twenty-eight  canons  in  the  same 
manner  and  for  the  same  reasons  as  the  pre- 
ceding, 

Beight. 

The  council  could  insist  with  all  plainness 
on  the  duty  of  hearing  before  condemning 
(see  on  Canon  XXIX.) ;  yet  on  this  occasion 


1  These  words  do  not  occur  ia  the  Acts. 


'i.e.,  a  conciliar  decree. 


U  2 


592 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


bishop  after  bishop  gave  vent  to  harsh  un-  they  were  so  eager  to  terrify  or  crush,  had 
feeling  absolutism,  the  only  excuse  for  which  actually  supported  Dioscorus  on  the  tragical 
consists  in  the  fact  that  the  outrages  of  the  |  August  8,  449.  It  was  not  in  human  nature 
Latrocinium  were  fresh  in  their  minds,  and  j  to  forget  this  ;  but  the  result  is  a  blot  on  the 
that  three  of  the  Egyptian  supplicants,  whom  |  history  of  the  Council  of  Chalcedon. 


EXTRACTS  FROM  THE  ACTS. 


SESSION  XVI. 


(Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  IV.,  col.  794.) 


Paschasinus  and  Lucentius,  the  most 
reverend  bishops,  holding  the  place  of  the 
Apostolic  See,  said :  If  your  magnificence 
so  orders,  we  have  something  to  lay  before 

The  most  glorious  judges,  said :  Say 
what  you  wish.  The  most  holy  Pascliasi- 
nus the  bishop,  holding  the  place  of  Rome, 
said :  The  rulers  of  the  world,  taking  care 
of  the  holy  Catholic  faith,  by  which  their 
kingdom  and  glory  is  increased,  have 
deigned  to  define  this,  in  order  that  unity 
through  a  holy  peace  may  be  preserved 
through  all  the  churches.  But  with  still 
greater  care  their  clemency  has  vouchsafed 
to  provide  for  the  future,  so  that  no  con- 
tention may  spring  up  again  between  God's 
bishops,  nor  any  schisms,  nor  any  scandal. 
But  yesterday  after  your  excellencies  and 
our  humility  had  left,  it  is  said  that  certain 
decrees  were  made,  which  we  esteem  to 
have  been  done  contrary  to  the  canons, 
and  contrary  to  ecclesiastical  discipline. 
We  request  that  your  magnificence  order 
these  things  to  be  read,  that  all  the  breth- 
ren may  know  whether  the  things  done  are 
just  or  unjust. 

The  most  glorious  judges  said :  If  any- 
thing was  done  after  our  leaving  let  it  be 
read. 

And  before  the  reading,  Aetius,  the  Arch- 
deacon of  the  Church  of  Constantinople 
said  :  It  is  certain  that  the  matters  touch- 
ing the  faith  received  a  suitable  form.  But 
it  is  customary  at  synods,  after  those  things 
which  are  chiefest  of  all  shall  have  been 
defined,  that  other  things  also  which  are 
necessary  should  be  examined  and  put 
into  shape.  We  have,  I  mean  the  most  holy 
Church  of  Constantinople  has,  manifestly 
things  to  be  attended  to.  We  asked  the 
lord  bishops  (tcvpiois  tch?  tTricrKOTrois)  from 


Rome,  to  join  with  us  in  these  matters,  but 
they  declined,  saying  they  had  received  no 
instructions  on  the  subject.  We  referred 
the  matter  to  your  magnificence  and  you 
bid  the  holy  Synod  to  consider  this  very 
point.  And  when  your  magnificence  had 
gone  forth,  as  the  affair  was  one  of  com- 
mon interest,  the  most  holy  bishops,  stand- 
ing up,  prayed  that  this  thing  might  be 
done.  And  they  were  present  here,  and 
this  was  done  in  no  hidden  nor  secret  fash- 
ion, but  in  due  course  and  in  accordance 
with  the  canons. 

The  most  glorious  judges  said :  Let  the 
acts  be  read. 

[The  canon  {number  XXVIII.),  teas  then 
read,  and  the  signatures,  in  cdl  192,  inclu- 
ding the  bishops  of  Antioch,  Jerusalem,  and 
Heraclea,  but  not  Thalassius  of  Ccesarea 
roho  afterwards  assented.  Only  a  ivee/c  be- 
fore 350  had  signed  the  Definition  of  faith. 
When  the  last  name  was  read  a  debate  arose 
asfolloios.     (Col.  810.).] 

Lucentius,  the  most  reverend  bishop  and 
legate  of  the  Apostolic  See,  said :  In  the 
first  place  let  your  excellency  notice  that 
it  was  brought  to  pass  by  circumventing 
the  holy  bishops  so  that  they  were  forced 
to  sign  the  as  yet  unwritten  canons,  of 
which  they  made  mention.  [The  Greek 
reads  a  little  differently  {I  have  followed  the 
Latin  as  it  is  supposed  by  the  critics  to  be 
more  pure  than  the  Greek  tve  noiv  have) : 
Your  excellency  has  perceived  how  many 
things  were  done  in  the  presence  of  the 
bishops,  in  order  that  no  one  might  be 
forced  to  sign  the  afore-mentioned  canons ; 
defining  by  necessity.] 

The  most  reverend  bishops  cried  out : 
No  one  was  forced, 


CHALCEDON.     A.t>.  451 


293 


Lucentius  the  most  reverend  bishop  and 
legate  of  the  Apostolic  See,  said :  It  is 
manifest  that  the  decrees  of  the  318  have 
been  put  aside,  and  that  mention  only  has 
been  made  of  those  of  the  150,  which  are 
not  found  to  have  any  place  in  the  synodi- 
cal  canons,  and  which  were  made  as  they 
acknowledge  eighty  years  ago.  If  there- 
fore they  enjoyed  this  privilege  during  these 
years,  what  do  they  seek  for  now?  If 
they  never  used  it,  why  seek  it?  [The 
Greek  reads :  "It  is  manifest  that  the  pres- 
ent decrees  have  been  added  to  the  decrees 
of  the  318  and  to  those  of  the  150  after 
them,  decrees  not  received  into  the  synodi- 
cal  canons,  these  things  they  pretend  to  be 
defined.  If  therefore  in  these  times  they 
used  this  benefit  what  now  do  they  seek 
which  according  to  the  canons  they  had 
not  used  ?] 


Aetius,  the  archdeacon  of  the  most  holy 
Church  of  Constantinople,  said :  If  on  this 
subject  they  had  received  any  commands, 
let  them  be  brought  forward. 

Bonifacius,  a  presbyter  and  vicar  of  the 
Apostolic  See,  said :  The  most  blessed  and 
Apostolic  Pope,  among  other  things,  gave 
us  this  commandment.  And  he  read  from 
the  chart,  "The  rulings  of  the  holy  fath- 
ers shall  with  no  rashness  be  violated  or 
diminished.  Let  the  dignity  of  our  per- 
son in  all  ways  be  guarded  by  you.  And 
if  any,  influenced  by  the  power  of  his 
own  city,  should  undertake  to  make  usur- 
pations, withstand  this  with  suitable  firm- 
ness." 

The  most  glorious  judges  said :  Let  each 
party  quote  the  canons. 


Paschasinus,  the  most  reverend  bishop 
and  representative,  read :  Canon  Six  of  the 
318  holy  fathers,  "The  Eom  an  Church  hath 
always  had  the  primacy.  Let  Egypt  there- 
fore so  hold  itself  that  the  bishop  of  Alex- 
andria have  the  authority  over  all,  for  this 
is  also  the  custom  as  regards  the  bishop  of 
Borne.  So  too  at  Antioch  and  in  the  other 
provinces  let  the  churches  of  the  larger 
cities  have  the  primacy.  [In  the  Greek  "let 
the  primacy  be  kept  to  the  churches ; "  a 
sentence  ivhich  I  do  not  understand,  unless  it 
means  that  for  the  advantage  of  the  churches 
the  primatial  rights  of  Antioch  must  be 
upheld.  But  such  a  sentiment  one  would 
expect  to  find  rather  in  the  Latin  than  in  the 
Greek.]  And  one  thing  is  abundantly  clear, 
that  if  any  one  shall  have  been  ordained 
bishop  contrary  to  the  will  of  the  metropol- 
itan, this  great  synod  has  decreed  that  such 
an  one  ought  not  to  be  bishop.  If  however 
the  judgment  of  all  his  own  [fellows]  is 
reasonable  and  according  to  the  canons, 
and  if  two  or  three  dissent  through  their 
own  obstinacy,  then  let  the  vote  of  the 
majority  prevail.  For  a  custom  has  pre- 
vailed, and  it  is  an  ancient  tradition,  that  the 
bishop  of  Jerusalem  be  honoured,  let  him 
have  his  consequent  honour,  but  the  rights 
of  his  own  metropolis  must  be  preserved." 

Constantine,  the  secretary,  read  from  a 
book  handed  him  by  Aetius,  the  archdeacon  ; 
Canon  Six  of  the  318  holy  Fathers.  "Let 
the  ancient  customs  prevail,  those  of  Egypt, 


NOTES. 

An  attempt  has  been  made  to  shew  that 
this  statement  of  the  acts  is  a  mere  blunder. 
That  no  correct  copy  of  the  Nicene  canons 
was  read,  and  that  the  council  accepted  the 
version  produced  by  the  Roman  legate  as 
genuine.  The  proposition  appears  to  me  in 
itself  ridiculous,  and  taken  in  connexion  with 
the  fact  that  the  acts  shew  that  the  true  canon 
of  Nice  was  read  immediately  afterwards  I 
cannot  think  the  hypothesis  really  worthy  of 
serious  consideration.  But  it  is  most  ably 
defended  by  the  Ballerini  in  their  edition  of 
St.  Leo's  works  (Tom.  iii.,  p.  xxxvij.  ct  seqq  ). 
and  Hefele  seems  to  have  accepted  their  con- 
clusions (Vol.  III.,  p.  435).  Bright,  however, 
I  think,  takes  a  most  just  view  of  the  case, 
whom  I  therefore  quote. 

Bright. 

If  we  place  ourselves  for  a  moment  in  the 
position  of  the  ecclesiastics  of  Constantinople 
when  they  heard  Paschasinus  read  his  "  ver- 
sion," which  the  Ballerini  gently  describe  as 
"  differing  a  little  "  from  the  Greek  text,  we 
shall  see  that  it  was  simply  impossible  for 
them  not  to  quote  that  text  as  it  was  pre- 
served in  their  archives,  and  had  been  correctly 
translated  by  Philo  and  Evarestus  in  their 
version  beginning  "Antiqui  mores  obti- 
neant."  No  comment  on  the  difference  be- 
tween it  and  the  Roman  "  version  "  is  record- 
ed to  have  been  made :  and,  in  truth,  none 
was  necessary.  Simply  to  confront  the  two, 
and  pass  on  to  the  next  point,  was  to  confute 


294 


CIIALCEDOK     A.D.  451 


so  that  the  bishop  of  Alexandria  shall  have 
jurisdiction  over  all,  since  this  also  is  the 
custom  at  Koine.  Likewise  at  Antioch  and 
in  the  rest  of  the  provinces,  let  the  rank 
(Trpeo-fieia)  be  preserved  to  the  churches. 
For  this  is  absolutely  clear  that  if  anyone 
contrary  to  the  will  of  the  metropolitan  be 
ordained  bishop,  such  an  one  the  great 
synod  decreed  should  not  be  a  bishop. 
If  however  by  the  common  vote  of  all, 
founded  upon  reason,  and  according  to  the 
canons,  two  or  three  moved  by  their  own 
obstinacy,  make  opposition,  let  the  vote  of 
the  majority  stand." 

The  same  secretary  read  from  the  same 
codex  the  determination  of  the  Second 
Synod.  "  These  things  the  bishops  decreed 
who  assembled  by  the  grace  of  God  in  Con- 
stantinople from  far  separated  provinces, 
.  .  .  and  bishops  are  not  to  go  to  churches 
which  are  outside  the  bounds  of  their  dio- 
ceses, nor  to  confound  the  churches,  but 
according  to  the  canons  the  bishop  of  Alex- 
andria shall  take  the  charge  of  the  affairs 
of  Egypt  only,  and  the  bishops  of  Orient 
shall  govern  the  Oriental  diocese  only,  the 
honours  due  to  the  Church  of  Antioch 
being  guarded  according  to  the  Nicene 
canons,  and  the  Asiatic  bishops  shall  care 
for  the  diocese  of  Asia  only,  and  those  of 
Pontus  the  affairs  of  Pontus  only,  and 
those  of  Thrace  the  affairs  of  Thrace  only. 
But  bishops  shall  not  enter  uncalled  another 
diocese  for  ordination,  or  any  other  eccle- 
siastical function.  And  the  aforesaid  canon 
concerning  dioceses  being  observed,  it  is 
evident  that  the  synod  of  every  province 
will  administer  the  affairs  of  that  particular 
province  as  was  decreed  at  Nice.  But  the 
churches  of  God  in  heathen  nations  must 
be  governed  according  to  the  custom  which 
has  prevailed  from  the  times  of  the  Fathers. 
The  bishop  of  Constantinople  however  shall 
have  the  prerogative  of  honour  next  after 
the  bishop  of  Rome,  because  Constantino- 
ple is  new  Borne." 


Paschasinus  at  once   most   respectfully  and 
most  expressively. 

It  should  be  added  that  the  Ballerini 
ground  their  theory  chiefly  upon  the  author- 
ity of  a  Latin  MS.,  the  Codex  Julianus,  now 
called  Parisicnsis,  in  which  this  reading  of  the 
true  text  of  the  canon  of  Nice  is  not  contained, 
as  Baluzius  was  the  first  to  point  out. 


The  most  glorious  judges  said  :  Let  the 
most  holy  Asiatic  and  Pontic  bishops  who 
have  signed  the  tome  just  read  say  whether 
they  gave  their  signatures  of  their  own  judg- 
ment or  compelled  by  any  necessity.  And 
when  these  were  come  into  the  midst,  the 
most  reverend  Diogenes,  the  bishop  of  Cy- 
zicum,  said :  I  call  God  to  witness  that  I 


signed  of  my  own  judgment.     [And  so  on, 
one  after  tlie  other.'] 

The  rest  cried  out :  We  signed  willing- 

The  most  glorious  judges  said  :  As  it  is 
manifest  that  the  subscription  of  each  one 
of  the  bishops  was  given  without  any 
necessity  but  of  his  own  will,  let  the  most 


CHALCEDON.     A.D.  451 


295 


holy  bishops  who  have  not  signed  say  some- 
thing. 

Eusebius,  the  bishop  of  Ancyra,  said :  I 
am  about  to  speak  but  for  myself  alone. 


_  [His  speech  is  a  personal  explanation  of 
his  own  action  toith  regard  to  consecrating 
a  bishop  for  Gangra.] 

The  most  glorious  judges   said:    From 
what  has  been  done  and  brought  forward  on 
each  side,  we  perceive  that  the  primacy  of 
all  (irpb  irdvrcov  tu  TrpcoTela)  and  the  chief 
honour  (ttjv  egaiperov  ti/jltjv)   according  to 
the  canons,  is  to  be  kept  for  the  most  God- 
beloved  archbishop  of  Old  Rome,  but  that 
the  most  reverend  archbishop  of  the  royal 
city  Constantinople,  which  is  new  Rome,  is 
to  enjoy  the  honour  of  the  same  primacy, 
and  to  have  the  power  to  ordain  the  metro- 
politans in  the  Asiatic,  Pontic,  and  Thra- 
cian  dioceses,  in  this  manner :  that  there  be 
elected  by  the  clergy,  and  substantial  {jcrn- 
Topmv)  and  most  distinguished  men  of  each 
metropolis  and  moreover  by  all  the  most 
reverend  bishops  of  the  province,  or  a  ma-  I 
jority  of  them,  and  that  he  be  elected  whom 
those  afore  mentioned  shall  deem  worthy  of 
the  metropolitan  episcopate  and  that   he 
should  be  presented  by  all  those  who  had 
elected  him  to  the  most  holy  archbishop 
of  royal  Constantinople,  that  he  might  be 
asked  whether  he  [i.e.,  the  Patriarch  of  Con- 
stantinople] willed  that  he  should  there  be 
ordained,  or  by  his  commission  in  the  prov- 
ince where  he   received  the  vote   to  the 
episcopate.     The  most  reverend  bishops  of 
the  ordinary  towns  should  be  ordained  by 
all  the  most  reverend  bishops  of  the  prov- 
ince or  by  a  majority  of  them,  the  metro- 


politan having  his  power  according  to  the 
established  canon  of  the  fathers,  and  mak- 
ing with  regard  to  such  ordinations  no  com- 
munications to  the  most  holy  archbishop  of 
royal  Constantinople.  Thus  the  matter  ap- 
pears to  us  to  stand.  Let  the  holy  Synod 
vouchsafe  to  teach  its  view  of  the  case. 

The  most  reverend  bishops  cried  out : 
This  is  a  just  sentence.  So  we  all  say. 
These  things  please  us  all.  This  is  a  just 
determination.  Establish  the  proposed 
form  of  decree.  This  is  a  just  vote.  All 
has  been  decreed  as  should  be.  We  beg 
you  to  let  us  go.  By  the  safety  of  the  Em- 
peror let  us  go.  We  all  will  remain  in  this 
opinion,  we  all  say  the  same  things. 

Lucentius,  the  bishop,  said:  The  Apostolic 
See  gave  orders  that  all  things  should  be 
done  in  our  presence  [This  sentence  reads  in 
the  Latin :   The  Apostolic  See  ought  not  to 
be  humiliated  in  our  presence.     I  do  not 
hioio   why    Canon    Bright    in  his  notes  on 
Canon  XX  VIII.  hasfolloived  this  reading]-, 
and  therefore  whatever  yesterday  was  done 
to  the  prejudice  of  the  canons  during  our 
1  absence,  we  beseech  your  highness  to  com- 
mand to  be  rescinded.     But  if  not,  let  our 
opposition  be  placed  in  the  minutes,  and 
pray  let  us  know  clearly  [Lat.   that  we  may 
know]  what  we  are  to  report  to  that  most 
apostolic  bishop  who  is  the  ruler  of  the 
whole  church,  so  that  he  may  be  able   to 
take  action  with   regard   to  the   indignity 
done  to  his  See  and  to  the  setting  at  naught 
of  the  canons. 

[John,  the  most  reverend  bishop  of  Se- 
baste,  said :  We  all  will  remain  of  the  opin- 
ion expressed  by  your  magnificence.1] 

The  most  glorious  judges  said  :  The  whole 
synod  has  approved  what  we  proposed, 


NOTES. 


Hefele. 
(Hist.  Counc,  Vol.  III.,  p.  428.) 
That  is,  the  prerogative  assigned  to  the 
Church  of  Constantinople  is,  in  spite  of  the 
opposition  of  the  Roman  legate  decreed  by 
the  Synod.  Thus  ended  the  Council  of  Chal- 
cedon  after  it  had  lasted  three  weeks. 

How  it  is  possible  after  reading  the  fore- 
going proceedings  to  imagine  for  an  instant 
that  the  bishops  of  this  Council  considered 
the  rights  they  were  discussing  to  be  of 
Divine   origin,  and  that  the  occupant  of  the 


See  of  Rome  was,  jure  divino,  supreme  over 
all  pontiffs  I  cannot  understand.  It  is  quite 
possible,  of  course,  to  affirm,  as  some  have 
done,  that  the  acts,  as  we  have  them,  have 
been  mutilated,  but  the  contention  involves 
not  only  many  difficulties  but  also  no  few  ab- 
surdities ;  and  yet  I  cannot  but  think  that 
even  this  extreme  hypothesis  is  to  be  pre- 
ferred to  any  attempt  to  reconcile  the  acts  as 
we  now  have  them  with  the  acceptance  on  the 
part  of  the  members  of  the  council  of  the 
doctrine  of  a  jure  divino  Papal  Supremacy  as 
it  is  now  held  by  the  Latin  Church. 


1  These  words  are  found  only  in  the  Latin. 


THE  FIFTH  ECUMENICAL  COUNCIL. 


THE  SECOND  COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANTINOPLE. 


A.D.  553. 


Emperor. — Justinian  I. 
Pope.  — Vigilius. 

Elenchm. 


Historical  Introduction. 

Excursus  on  the  genuineness  of  the  Acts 
of  the  Council. 

Tlie  Emperor's  Letter. 

Extracts  from  the  Acts,  Session  VII. 

The  Sentence  of  the  Synod. 

TJie  Capitula  of  the  Council. 

Excursus  on  the  XV.  Anathematisms 
against  Origen. 


The  Anathemas  against  Origen  paral- 
leled with  the  Anathematisms  of  the  Em- 
peror Justinian. 

Historical  Note  to  the  Decretal  Letter  of 
Pope  Vigilius. 

The  Decretal  Letter  of  the  Pope,  ivith  In- 
troductory Note. 

Historical  Excursus  on  the  after-history 
of  the  Council. 


HISTORICAL  INTRODUCTION. 

(Hefele,  History  of  the  Councils,  Vol.  IV.,  p.  289.) 
In  accordance  with  the  imperial  command,  but  without  the  assent  of  the  Pope,  the  synod 
was  opened  on  the  5th  of  May  a.d.  553,  in  the  Secretarium  of  the  Cathedral  Church  at  Con- 
stantinople. Among  those  present  were  the  Patriarchs,  Eutychius  of  Constantinople,  who 
presided,  Apollinaris  of  Alexandria,  Domninus  of  Antioch,  three  bishops  as  representatives 
of  the  Patriarch  Eustochius  of  Jerusalem,  and  145  other  metropolitans  and  bishops,  of  whom 
many  came  also  in  the  place  of  absent  colleagues. 

(Bossuet,  Def.  Cleri  Gall.,  Lib.  vij.,  cap.  six.  Abridged.  Translation  by  Allies.) 
The  three  chapters  were  the  point  in  question  ;  that  is,  respecting  Theodore  of  Mopsues- 
tia,  Theodoret's  writings  against  Cyril,  and  the  letter  of  Ibas  of  Edessa  to  Maris  the  Persian. 
They  examined  whether  that  letter  had  been  approved  in  the  Council  of  Chalcedon.  So 
much  was  admitted  that  it  had  been  read  there,  and  that  Ibas,  after  anathematizing  Nesto- 
rius,  had  been  received  by  the  holy  Council.  Some  contended  that  his  person  only  was 
spared  ;  others  that  his  letter  also  was  approved.  Thus  inquiry  was  made  at  the  fifth  Coun- 
cil how  the  writings  on  the  Faith  were  wont  to  be  approved  in  former  Councils.  The  Acts 
of  the  third  and  fourth  Council,  those  which  we  have  mentioned  above  respecting  the  letter 
of  St.  Cyril  and  of  St.  Leo,  were  set  forth.  Then  the  holy  Council  declared :  "  It  is  plain, 
from  what  has  been  recited,  in  what  manner  the  holy  Councils  are  wont  to  approve  what  is 
brought  before  them.  For  great  as  was  the  dignity  of  those  holy  men  who  wrote  the  letters 
recited,  yet  they  did  not  approve  their  letters  simply  or  without  inquiry,  nor  without  taking 
cognizance  that  they  were  in  all  things  agreeable  to  the  exposition  and  doctrine  of  the  holy 
Fathers,  with  which  they  were  compared."  But  the  Acts  proved  that  this  course  was  not 
pursued  in  the  case  of  the  letter  of  Ibas  ;  they  inferred,  therefore,  most  justly,  that  that  let- 
ter had  not  been  approved.  So,  then,  it  is  certain  from  the  third  and  fourth  Councils,  the 
fifth  so  declaring  and  understanding  it,  that  letters  approved  by  the  Apostolic  See,  such  as 
was  that  of  Cyril,  or  even  proceeding  from  it,  as  that  of  Leo,  were  received  by  the  holy  Coun- 
cils not  simply,  nor  without  inquiry.  The  holy  Fathers  proceed  to  do  what  the  Bishops  at 
Chalcedon  would  have  done,  had  they  undertaken  the  examination  of  Ibas's  letter.  They 
compare  the  letter  with  the  Acts  of  Ephesus  and  Chalcedon.  Which  done,  the  holy  Council 
declared — "  The  comparison  made  proves,  beyond  a  doubt,  that  the  letter  which  Ibas  is  said 
to  have  written  is,  in  all  respects,  opposed  to  the  definition  of  the  right  Faith,  which  the 
Council  of  Chalcedon  set  forth."  All  the  Bishops  cried  out,  "  We  all  say  this  ;  the  letter  is 
heretical."  Thus,  therefore,  is  it  proved  by  the  fifth  Council,  that  our  holy  Fathers  in 
Ecumenical  Councils  pronounce  the  letters  read,  whether  of  Catholics  or  heretics,  or  even 
of  Roman  Pontiffs,  and  that  on  matter  of  Faith,  to  be  orthodox  or  heretical,  according  to  the 
same  procedure,  after  legitimate  cognizance,  the  truth  being  inquired  into,  and  then  cleared 
up  ;  and  upon  these  premises  judgment  given. 

What !  you  will  say,  with  no  distinction,  and  with  minds  equally  inclined  to  both  parties  ? 
Indeed,  we  have  said,  and  shall  often  repeat,  that  there  was  a  presumption  in  favour  of  the 
decrees  of  orthodox  Pontiffs  ;  but  in  Ecumenical  Councils,  where  judgment  is  to  be  passed 
in  matter  of  Faith,  that  they  were  bound  no  longer  to  act  upon  presumption,  but  on  the 
truth  clearly  and  thoroughly  ascertained. 

Such  were  the  Acts  of  the  fifth  Council.  This  it  learnt  from  the  third  and  fourth  Coun- 
cils, and  approved  ;  and  in  this  argument  we  have  brought  at  once  in  favour  of  our  opinion 
the  decrees  of  three  Ecumenical  Councils,  of  Ephesus,  of  Chalcedon,  and  the  second  Con- 


300  II.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  553 

stantinopolitan.  The  Emperor  Justinian  desired  that  the  question  concerning  the  above- 
mentioned  Three  Chapters  should  be  considered  in  the  Church.  He  therefore  sent  for  Pope 
Vigilius  to  Constantinople.  There  he  not  long  after  assembled  a  council.  He  and  the 
Orientals  thought  it  of  great  moment  that  these  Chapters  should  be  condemned,  against  the 
Nestorians,  who  were  raising  their  heads  to  defend  them  ;  Vigilius,  with  the  Occidentals, 
feared  let  this  occasion  should  be  taken  to  destroy  the  authority  of  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  : 
because  it  was  admitted  that  Theodoret  and  Ibas  had  been  received  in  that  Council,  whilst 
Theodore,  though  named,  was  let  go  without  any  mark  of  censure.  Though  then  both  par- 
ties easily  agreed  as  to  the  substance  of  the  Faith,  yet  the  question  had  entirely  respect  to 
the  Faith,  it  being  feared  by  the  one  party  lest  the  Nestorian,  by  the  other  lest  the  Euty- 
chian,  enemies  of  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  should  prevail.  Vigilius  on  the  11th  of  April, 
548,  issues  his  "  Judicatum  "  against  the  Three  Chapters,  saving  the  authority  of  the  Council 
of  Chalcedon.  Thereupon  the  Bishops  of  Africa,  Illyria,  and  Dalmatia,  with  two  of  his  own 
confidential  Deacons,  withdraw  from  his  communion.  In  the  year  550  the  African  Bishops, 
under  Beparatus  of  Carthage,  not  only  reject  the  Judicatum,  but  anathematize  Vigilius  him- 
self, and  sever  him  from  Catholic  Communion,  reserving  to  him  a  place  for  repentance.  At 
length  the  Pope  publicly  withdraws  his  "  Judicatum."  While  the  Council  is  sitting  at  Con- 
stantinople he  publishes  his  "  Constitutum,"  in  which  he  condemns  certain  propositions  of 
Theodore,  but  spares  his  person  ;  the  same  respecting  Theodoret ;  but  Avith  respect  to  Ibas, 
he  declares  that  his  letter  was  pronounced  orthodox  by  the  Council  of  Chalcedon.  However 
this  may  be,  so  much  is  clear,  that  Vigilius,  though  invited,  declined  being  present  at  the 
council :  that  nevertheless  the  council  was  held  without  him  ;  that  he  published  a  "  Consti- 
tutum," in  which  he  disapproved  of  what  Theodore,  Theodoret,  and  Ibas  were  said  to  have 
written  against  the  Faith  ;  but  decreed  that  their  names  should  be  spared  because  they  were 
considered  to  have  been  received  by  the  fourth  Council,  or  to  have  died  in  the  communion 
of  the  Church,  and  to  be  reserved  to  the  judgment  of  God.  Concerning  the  letter  of  Ibas, 
he  published  the  following,  that,  "understood  in  the  best  and  most  pious  sense,"  it  was 
blameless  ;  and  concerning  the  three  Chapters  generally,  he  ordered  that  after  his  present 
declaration  ecclesiastics  should  move  no  further  question. 

Such  was  the  decree  of  Vigilius,  issued  upon  the  authority  with  which  he  was  invested. 
But  the  council,  after  his  Constitution,  both  raised  a  question  about  the  Three  Chapters, 
and  decided  that  question  was  properly  raised  concerning  the  dead,  and  that  the  letter  of 
Ibas  was  manifestly  heretical  and  Nestorian,  and  contrary  in  all  things  to  the  Faith  of  Chal- 
cedon, and  that  they  were  altogether  accursed,  who  defended  the  impious  Theodore  of  Mop- 
suestia,  or  the  writings  of  Theodoret  against  Cyril,  or  the  impious  letter  of  Ibas  defending 
the  tenets  of  Nestorius :  and  all  such  as  did  not  anathematize  it,  but  said  it  was  correct. 

In  these  latter  words  they  seemed  not  even  to  spare  Vigilius,  although  they  did  not  men- 
tion his  name.  And  it  is  certain  their  decree  was  confirmed  by  Pelagius  the  Second,  Gregory 
the  Great,  and  other  Boman  Pontiffs.  .  .  .  These  things  prove,  that  in  a  matter  of  the 
utmost  importance,  disturbing  the  whole  Church,  and  seeming  to  belong  to  the  Faith,  the 
decrees  of  sacred  councils  prevail  over  the  decrees  of  Pontiffs,  and  that  the  letter  of  Ibas, 
though  defended  by  a  judgment  of  the  Boman  Pontiff,  could  nevertheless  be  proscribed  as 
heretical. 


EXCURSUS  ON  THE  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  ACTS  OF  THE  FIFTH  COUNCIL. 

Some  suspicion  has  arisen  with  regard  to  how  far  the  acts  of  the  Fifth  Ecumenical  Coun- 
cil may  be  relied  upon.  Between  the  Roman  Manuscript  printed  by  Labbe  and  the  Paris 
manuscript  found  in  Mansi  there  are  considerable  variations  and,  strange  to  say,  some  of 
the  most  injurious  things  to  the  memory  of  Pope  Vigilius  are  found  only  in  the  Paris  manu- 
script. Moreover  we  know  that  the  manuscript  kept  in  the  patriarchal  archives  at  Con- 
stantinople had  been  tampered  with  during  the  century  that  elapsed  before  the  next 
Ecumenical  Synod,  for  at  that  council  the  forgeries  and  interpolations  were  exposed  by  the 
Papal  Legates. 

At  the  XlVth  Session  of  that  synod  the  examination  of  the  genuineness  of  the  acts  of  the 
Second  Council  of  Constantinople  was  resumed.  It  had  been  begun  at  the  Xllth  Session. 
Up  to  this  time  only  two  MSS.  had  been  used,  now  the  librarian  of  the  patriarchate  presented 
a  third  MS.  which  he  had  found  in  the  archives,  and  swore  that  neither  himself  nor  any 
other  so  far  as  he  knew  had  made  any  change  in  these  MSS.  These  were  then  compared  and 
it  was  found  that  the  two  first  agreed  in  containing  the  pretended  letter  of  Mennas  to  Pope 
Vigilius,  and  the  two  writings  addressed  by  Vigilius  to  Justinian  and  Theodora  ;  but  that 
none  of  these  were  found  in  the  third  MS.  It  was  further  found  that  the  documents  in  dis- 
pute were  in  a  different  hand  from  the  rest  of  the  MS.,  and  that  in  the  first  book  of  the 
parchment  MS.,  three  quarternions  had  been  inserted,  and  in  the  second  book  between 
quarternions  15  and  16,  four  unpaged  leaves  had  been  placed.  So  too  the  second  MS.  had 
been  tampered  with.  The  council  inserted  these  particulars  in  a  decree,  and  ordered  that 
"  these  additions  must  be  quashed  in  both  MSS.,  and  marked  with  an  obelus,  and  the  falsi- 
fiers must  be  smitten  with  anathema. "  Finally  the  council  cried  out,  "  Anathema  to  the 
pretended  letters  of  Mennas  and  Vigilius  !  Anathema  to  the  forger  of  Acts  !  Anathema  to 
all  who  teach,  etc." 

From  all  this  it  would  seem  that  the  substantial  accuracy  of  the  rest  of  the  acts  have 
been  established  by  the  authority  of  the  Sixth  Synod,  and  Hefele  and  all  recent  scholars  fol- 
low Mansi's  Paris  MS. 

It  may  be  well  here  to  add  that  a  most  thorough-going  attack  upon  the  acts  has  been 
made  in  late  years  by  Professor  Vincenzi,  in  defence  of  Pope  Vigilius  and  of  Origen.  The 
reader  is  referred  to  his  writings  on  the  subject :  In  Sancti  Oregorii  Nysseni  et  Originis 
scripta  ct  doctrinam  nova  defcnsio;  Vigil.,  Orig.,  Justin,  triumph.,  in  Synod  V.  (Komse,  1865.) 
The  Catholic  Dictionary  frankly  says  that  this  is  "  an  attempt  to  deny  the  most  patent  facts, 
and  treat  some  of  the  chief  documents  as  forgeries,"  and  "unworthy  of  serious  notice."1 

1  Addis  and  Arnold.  A  Catholic  Dictionary.  Sixth  Ed.  with  imprimatur  signed  by  Cards.  Manning  and  McCloskey,  s.v.  Three 
Chapters. 


EXTRACTS  FROM  THE  ACTS, 


SESSION  I. 


(Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  V.,  col.  419.) 


[TJie  Emperor's  Letter  which  teas  read  to 
the  Fathers.] 

In  the  Name  of  our  Lord  God  Jesus 
Christ.  The  Emperor  Flavins  Justinian, 
German,  Gothic,  etc.,  and  always  Augustus, 
to  the  most  blessed  bishops  and  patriarchs, 
Eutychius  of  Constantinople,  Apollinarius 
of  Alexandria,  Domninus  of  Theopolis, 
Stephen,  George,  and  Damian,  the  most  re- 
ligious bishops  taking  the  place  of  that  man 
of  singular  blessedness,  Eustochius,  the 
Archbishop  and  Patriarch  of  Jerusalem,  and 
the  other  most  religious  bishops  stopping  in 
this  royal  city  from  the  different  provinces. 

[The  following  is  the  letter  condensed,  in- 
cluding Hefele's  digest.  History  of  the 
Councils,  Vol.  IV.,  p.  298.] 

The  effort  of  my  predecessors,  the  ortho- 
dox Emperors,  ever  aimed  at  the  settling  of 
controversies  which  had  arisen  respecting 
the  faith  by  the  calling  of  Synods.  For 
this  cause  Constantine  assembled  318 
Fathers  at  Nice,  and  was  himself  present 
at  the  Council,  and  assisted  those  who  con- 
fessed the  Son  to.  be  consubstantial  with 
the  Father.  Theodosius,  150  at  Constan- 
tinople, Theodosius  the  younger,  the  Synod 
of  Ephesus,  the  Emperor  Marcian,  the 
bishops  at  Chalcedon.  As,  however,  after 
Marcian's  death,  controversies  respecting 
the  Synod  of  Chalcedon  had  broken  out  in 
several  places,  the  Emperor  Leo  wrote  to 
all  bishops  of  all  places,  in  order  that  every- 
one might  declare  his  opinion  in  writing 
with  regard  to  this  holy  Council.  Soon 
afterwards,  however,  had  arisen  again  the 
adherents  of  Nestorius  and  Eutyches,  and 
caused  great  divisions,  so  that  many 
Churches  had  broken  off  communion  with 
one  another.  When,  now,  the  grace  of  God 
raised  us  to  the  throne,  we  regarded  it  as 
our  chief  business  to  unite  the  Churches 
again,  and  to  bring  the  Synod  of  Chalcedon, 
together  with  the  three  earlier,  to  universal 


acceptance.  We  have  won  many  who  pre- 
viously opposed  that  Synod ;  others,  who 
persevered  in  their  opj)Osition,  we  banished, 
and  so  restored  the  unity  of  the  Church 
again.  But  the  Nestorians  want  to  impose 
their  heresy  upon  the  Church  ;  and,  as  they 
could  not  use  Nestorius  for  that  purpose, 
they  made  haste  to  introduce  their  errors 
through  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  the 
teacher  of  Nestorius,  who  taught  still  more 
grievous  blasphemies  than  his.  He  main- 
tained, e.g.,  that  God  the  Word  was  one, 
and  Christ  another.  For  the  same  purpose 
they  made  use  of  those  impious  writings  of 
Theodoret  which  were  directed  against  the 
first  Synod  of  Ephesus,  against  Cyril  and 
his  Twelve  Chapters,  and  also  the  shameful 
letter  which  Ibas  is  said  to  have  written. 
They  maintain  that  this  letter  was  accepted 
by  the  Synod  of  Chalcedon,  and  so  would 
free  from  condemnation  Nestorius  and  Theo- 
dore who  were  commended  in  the  letter. 
If  they  were  to  succeed,  the  Logos  could 
no  longer  be  said  to  be  "  made  man,"  nor 
Mary  called  the  Mother  (genetrix)  of  God. 
We,  therefore,  following  the  holy  Fathers, 
have  first  asked  you  in  writing  to  give  your 
judgment  on  the  three  impious  chapters 
named,  and  you  have  answered,  and  have 
joyfully  confessed  the  true  faith.  Because, 
however,  after  the  condemnation  proceed- 
ing from  you,  there  are  still  some  who  de- 
fend the  Three  Chapters,  therefore  we  have 
summoned  you  to  the  capital,  that  you  may 
here,  in  common  assembly,  place  again 
your  view  in  the  light  of  day.  When,  for 
example,  Vigilius,  Pope  of  Old  Borne,  came 
hither,  he,  in  answer  to  our  questions,  re- 
peatedly anathematised  in  writing  the  Three 
Chapters,  and  confirmed  his  steadfastness 
in  this  view  by  much,  even  by  the  condem- 
nation of  his  deacons,  Busticus  and  Sebas- 
tian. We  possess  still  his  declarations  in 
his  own  hand.  Then  he  issued  his  Judi- 
catum,  in  which  he  anathematised  the  Three 
Chapters,  with  the  words,  Et  quoniam,  etc. 
You  know  that  he  not  only  deposed  Busti- 


II.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  553 


303 


cus  and  Sebastian  because  they  defended 
the  Three  Chapters,  but  also  wrote  to  Valen- 
tinian,  bishop  of  Scythia,  and  Aurelian, 
bishop  of  Aries,  that  nothing  might  be  un- 
dertaken against  the  Juclicatum.  "When 
you  afterwards  came  hither  at  my  invita- 
tion, letters  were  exchanged  between  you 
and  Vigilius  in  order  to  a  common  assem- 
bly.1 But  now  he  had  altered  his  view, 
would  no  longer  have  a  synod,  but  required 
that  only  the  three  patriarchs  and  one 
other  bishop  (in  communion  Avith  the  Pope 
and  the  three  bishops  about  him)  should 
decide  the  matter.  In  vain  we  sent  several 
commands  to  him  to  take  part  in  the 
synod.  He  rejected  also  our  two  pro- 
posals, either  to  call  a  tribunal  for  decision, 
or  to  hold  a  smaller  assembly,  at  Avhich,  be- 
sides him  and  his  three  bishops,  every  other 
patriarch  should  have  place  and  voice,  with 
from  three  to  five  bishops  of  his  diocese.'5' 
We  further  declare  that  we  hold  fast  to  the 
decrees  of  the  four  Councils,  and  in  every 
way  follow  the  holy  Fathers,  Athanasius, 
Hilary,  Basil,  Gregory  the  Theologian, 
Gregory  of  Nyssa,  Ambrose,  Theophilus, 
John  (Chrysostom)  of  Constantinople,  Cy- 
ril, Augustine,  Proclus,  Leo  and  their  writ- 
ings on  the  true  faith.  As,  however1,  the 
heretics  are  resolved  to  defend  Theodore  of 
Mopsuestia  and  Nestorius  with  their  impi- 
eties, and  maintain  that  that  letter  of  Ibas 
was  received  by  the  Synod  of  Chalcedon, 
so  do  we  exhort  you  to  direct  your  atten- 
tion to  the  impious  writings  of  Theodore, 
and  especially  to  his  Jewish  Creed  which 
was  brought  forward  at  Ephesus  and  Chal- 
cedon, and  anathematized  by  each  synod 
with  those  who  had  so  held  or  did  so  hold  ; 
and  we  further  exhort  you  to  consider  what 
the  holy  Fathers  have  written  concerning 
him  and  his  blasphemies,  as  well  as  what 
our  predecessors  have  promulgated,  as  also 
what  the  Church  historians  have  set  forth 


concerning  him.2  You  will  thence  see  that 
he  and  his  heresies  have  since  been  con- 
demned and  that  therefore  his  name  has 
long  since  been  struck  from  the  diptychs 
of  the  Church  of  Mopsuestia.  Consider  the 
absurd  assertion  that  heretics  ought  not  to 
be  anathematized  after  their  deaths ;  and 
we  exhort  you  further  to  follow  in  this  mat- 
ter the  doctrine  of  the  holy  Fathers,  who 
condemned  not  only  living  heretics  but  also 
anathematized  after  their  death  those  who 
had  died  in  their  iniquity,  just  as  those 
who  had  been  unjustly  condemned  they 
restored  after  their  death  and  wrote  their 
names  in  the  sacred  diptychs ;  which  took 
place  in  the  case  of  John  and  of  Flavian  of 
pious  memory,  both  of  them  bishops  of 
Constantinople.3  Moreover  we  exhort  you 
to  examine  the  writing  of  Theodoret  and  the 
supposed  letter  of  Ibas,  in  which  the  incar- 
nation of  the  Word  is  denied,  the  expres- 
sion "  Mother  of  God  "  and  the  holy  Synod 
of  Ephesus  rejected,  Cyril  called  a  heretic, 
and  Theodore  and  Nestorius  defended  and 
praised.  And  as  they  say  that  the  Council 
of  Chalcedon  has  received  this  letter,  you 
must  compare  the  declarations  of  this  Coun- 
cil relating  to  the  faith  Avith  the  contents  of 
the  impious  letter.  Finally,  we  entreat  you 
to  accelerate  the  matter.  For  he  who  Avhen 
asked  concerning  the  right  faith,  puts  off 
his  ansAver  for  a  long  Avhile,  does  nothing 
else  but  deny  the  right  faith.  For  in  ques- 
tioning and  ansAvering  on  things  which  are 
of  faith,  it  is  not  he  who  is  found  first  or 
second,  but  he  who  is  the  more  ready  Avith 
a  right  confession,  that  is  acceptable  to 
God.  May  God  keep  you,  most  holy  and 
religious  fathers,  for  many  years.  Given 
IV.  Nones  of  May,  at  Constantinople,  in 
the  xxviith  year  of  the  reign  of  the  imperial 
lord  Justinian,  the  perpetual  Augustus,  and 
in  the  xiith  year  after  the  consulate  of  the 
most  illustrious  Basil. 


1  From  here  to  the  next  asterisk,  the  text  varies.    Hefeie  says 
he  follows  the  Paris  codex  with  "  abridgments." 

2  The  emperor  could  say  that  the  letter  was  condemned  at 
Chalcedon,  because  the  Acts  of  Ephesus  were  read  in  the  first 


session  of  Chalcedon.    Garnier  is  in  error  with  regard  to  this,  as 
Hefeie  points  out. 

3  This  I  have  given  in  full. 


EXTRACTS  FROM  THE  ACTS, 


SESSION  VII. 


{From  the  Paris  manuscript  found  in  Hardouin  Concilia,  Tom.  III.,  171  et  seqq.; 
Mansi,  Tom.  ix.,  346  et  seqq.  This  speech  is  not  found  in  full  in  any  other  MS. 
The  Ballerini\Hefele  notes]  raise  objections  to  the  genuineness  of  the  additions  [in  Noris. 
Opp.,  Tom.  IV.,  1037],  but  Hefele  does  not  consider  the  objections  of  serious  moment. 
[Hist,  of  the  Councils,  Vol.  IV.,  p.  323,  note  2.]  All  the  MSS.  agree  thai  The  most 
glorious  queestor  of  the  sacred  palace,  Constantine,  was  sent  by  the  most  pious  Em- 
peror, and  when  he  had  entered  the  Council  spake  as  follows  :  "  Certum  est  vestree  beati- 
tudini,  quantum,  etc."  The  rest  of  the  speech  differs  in  the  different  manuscripts.  I 
follow  that  of  Paris.) 


You  know  how  much  care  the  most  in- 
vincible Emperor  has  always  had  that  the 
contention  raised  up  by  certain  persons 
with  regard  to  the  Three  Chapters  should 
have  a  termination.  .  .  .  For  this  in- 
tent he  has  required  the  most  religious 
Vigilius  to  assemble  with  you  and  draw 
up  a  decree  on  this  matter  in  accordance 
with  the  Orthodox  faith.  Although  there- 
fore, Vigilius  has  already  frequently  con- 
demned the  Three  Chapters  in  writing,  and 
has  done  this  also  by  word  of  mouth  in 
the  presence  of  the  Emperor,  and  of  the 
most  glorious  judges  and  of  many  members 
of  this  synod,  and  has  alwa}rs  been  ready 
to  smite  with  anathema  the  defenders  of 
Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  and  the  letter 
which  was  attributed  to  Ibas,  and  the  writ- 
ings of  Theodoret  which  he  set  forth  against 
the  orthodox  faith  and  against  the  twelve 
capitula  of  the  holy  Cyril : J  yet  he  has  re- 
fused to  do  this  in  communion  with  you 
and  your  synod. 

Yesterday  Vigilius  sent  Servus  Dei,  a 
most  reverend  Subdeacon  of  the  Konian 
Church,  and  invited  Belisarius,2  Cethegus, 
as  also  Justinus  and  Constantine  the  most 
glorious  consuls,  as  well  as  bishops  Theo- 
dore, Ascidas,  Benignus,and  Phocas,  to  come 
to  him  as  he  wished  to  give  through  them  an 
answer  to  the  Emperor.  They  came,  but 
speedily  returned  and  informed  the  most 
pious  lord,  that  we  had  visited  Vigilius,  the 
most  religious  bishop,  and  that  he  had  said 
to  us  :  "We  have  called  you  for  this  reason, 
that  you  may  know  what  things  have  been 
done  in  the  past  days.  To  this  end  I  have 
written   a  document   about   the   disputed 


Three  Chapters,  addressed  to  the  most 
pious  Emperor,3  pray  be  good  enough  to 
read  it,  and  to  carry  it  to  his  Serenity." 
But  when  we  had  heard  this  and  had  seen 
the  document  written  to  your  serenity,  we 
said  to  him  that  we  could  not  by  any  means 
receive  any  document  written  to  the  most 
pious  Emperor  without  his  bidding.  "  But 
you  have  deacons  for  running  with  messa- 
ges, by  whom  you  can  send  it."  He,  how- 
ever, said  to  us  :  "  You  now  know  that  I 
have  made  the  document."  But  we,  bishops, 
answered  him :  "  If  your  blessedness  is 
willing  to  meet  together  with  us  and  the 
most  holy  Patriarchs,  and  the  most  religious 
bishops,  and  to  treat  of  the  Three  Chapters 
and  to  give,  in  unison  with  us  all,  a  suitable 
form  of  the  orthodox  faith,  as  the  Holy 
Apostles  and  the  holy  Fathers  and  the  four 
Councils  have  done,  we  will  hold  thee  as 
our  head,  as  a  father  and  primate.  But  if 
your  holiness  has  drawn  up  a  document 
for  the  Emperor,  you  have  errand-runners, 
as  we  have  said ;  send  it  by  them."  And 
when  he  had  heard  these  things  from  us,  he 
sent  Servus  Dei  the  Subdeacon,  who  now 
awaits  the  answer  of  your  serenity.  And 
when  his  Piety  had  heard  this,  he  com- 
manded through  the  aforesaid  most  relig- 
ious and  glorious  men,  the  before-named 
subdeacon  to  carry  back  this  message  to  the 
most  religious  Vigilius :  "  We  invited  him 
(you)  to  meet  together  with  the  most  blessed 
patriarchs  and  other  religious  bishops,  and 
with  them  in  common  to  examine  and  judge 
the  Three  Chapters.  But  since  you  have 
refused  to  do  this,  and  you  say  that  you 
alone  have  written  by  yourself  somewhat  on 


1  Thus  far  the  MSS.  agree  almost  word  for  word, 
gence  for  the  rest  is  most  marked. 


The  diver-  | 


2  There  is  some  douht  about  this  name. 

3  This  was  the  "Constitutum," 


II.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  553 


the  Three  Chapters ;  if  you  have  condemned 
them,  in  accordance  with  those  things  which 
you  did  before,  we  have  already  many  such 
statements  and  need  no  more ;  but  if  you 
have  written  now  something  contrary  to 
these  things  which  were  done  by  you  before 
you  have  condemned  yourself  by  your  own 
writing,  since  you  have  departed  from 
orthodox  doctrine  and  have  defended  im- 
piety. And  how  can  you  expect  us  to  re- 
ceive such  a  document  from  you  ?  " 

And  when  this  answer  was  given  by  the 
most  pious  Emperor,  he  did  not  send 
tlirough  the  same  deacon  any  document  in 
writing  from  himself.  And  all  this  was 
done  without  writing  as  also  to  your  blessed- 


305 

his  rule.  And  when  you  hear  this  minute 
again  you  will  perceive  by  it  how  much  the 
most  serene  Emperor  cares  for  the  unitv 
of  the  holy  churches  and  for  the  purity  of 
the  holy  mysteries.  J 


[JTe  then,  according  to  all  the  MSS.,  pre- 
sented certain  documents  to  he  read,  in  the 
Mb.  printed  ly  Zatte  and  Cossart,  Tom 

I;%\ '  v9  etJtqq-  ,  These  are  fewer  than 
m  the  Paris  MS.,  which  last  also  contains 
the  following  just  after  the  reading  of  the 
documents  and  after  the  Council 'had  de- 
clared that  thsy  proved  the  Emperor's  zeal 
jor  thefcnth.]  * 

J^wFt*?' the  S?8*  Slorious  Q^tov, 
said :   While  I  am  still  present  at  your  holy 

council  by  reason  of  the  reading  of 'the  docu- ' 
ments  which  have  been  presented  to  you, 
1  would  say  that  the  most  pious  Emperor 
has  sent  a  minute  (formam),  to  your  Holy 
bynod  concerning  the  name  of  Vigilius 
tvi  J?.ao  more  insei-ted  in  the  holy  dip- 
tychs  of  the  Church,  on  account  of  the  im- 
piety which  he  defended.  Neither  let  it  be 
recited  by  you,  nor  retained  eifcher  ^   h 

church  of  the  royal  city,  or  in  other  churches 
Which  are  intrusted  to  you  and  to  the  other  I 
bishops  in  the  State  committed  by  God  to! 


[The  letter  was  then  read.] 

JOaI  \fJ  S^od.said :  What  has  seemed 
good  to  the  most  pious  Emperor  is  congru- 
ous to  the  labours  which  he  bears  for  the 
unity  of  the  churches.  Let  us  preserve 
unity  to  (ad)  the  Apostolic  See  of  the  most 
holy  Church  of  ancient  Rome,  carrying  out 
all  things  according  to  the  tenor  of  what  has 
been  read.  De  proposita  vero  question© 
quod  jam  promisimus  procedat, 

NOTES. 

Hefele  understands  that  the  Council  heard 

?W  TTvd  tWs  letter  0f  the Emperor's,  but 
that  the  "Emperor  did  not  mean  entirely  to 
bieak  off  communion  with  the  Apostolic  see 
nether  did  he  wish  the  Synod  to  do  so" 
{Hist.  Councils  Vol.  IV.,  p.  326),  as  indeed  he 
says  m  his  letter. 

The  Ballerini  consider   this   letter  of   the 
iLmperors  to  be  spurious,  but  (says  Hefele) 
on  insufficient  grounds  "  (l.  c,  p.  326,  note  3). 
The  expressions  used  by  the   Emperor  may 
not  unnaturally  be  somewhat  startling  to  those 
holding  the  theological  position  of  the  Bal- 
lerini :    "We  will  not  endure  to  receive  the 
spotless  communion  from  him  nor  from  anv 
one  else  who  does  not  condemn  this  impiety 
.     .     .     lest  we  be  found  thus  communicating- 
with  the  impiety  of  Nestorius  and  Theodore  " 
It  is  noteworthy  that  the  Fifth  Ecumenical 
Council  should  strike  the  name  of  the  rein- 
ing Pope  from  the  diptychs  as  a  father  of 
heresy  ;  and  that  the  Sixth  Ecumenical  Synod 
should  anathematize  another  Pope  as  a  here- 


VOL.    XIV. 


X 


THE  SENTENCE  OF  THE  SYNOD. 


(From  the  Acts.     Collation  VIII.,  L.  and  C,  Cone,  Tom.  V.,  col.  562.) 


Our  Great  God  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ, 
as  we  learn  from  the  parable  in  the  Gospel, 
distributes  talents  to  each  man  according 
to  his  ability,  and  at  the  fitting  time  demands 
an  account  of  the  work  done  by  every  man. 
And  if  he  to  whom  but  one  talent  has  been 
committed  is  condemned  because  he  has 
not  worked  with  it  but  only  kept  it  without 
loss,  to  how  much  greater  and  more  horri- 
ble judgment  must  he  be  subject  who  not 
only  is  negligent  concerning  himself,  but 
even  places  a  stumbling-block  and  cause  of 
offence  in  the  way  of  others  ?  Since  it  is 
manifest  to  all  the  faithful  that  whenever 
any  question  arises  concerning  the  faith, 
not  only  the  impious  man  himself  is  con- 
demnecl,  but  also  he  who  when  he  has  the 
power  to  correct  impiety  in  others,  neglects 
to  do  so.1 

We  therefore,  to  whom  it  has  been  com- 
mitted to  rule  the  church  of  the  Lord,  fear- 
ing the  curse  which  hangs  over  those  who 
negligently  perform  the  Lord's  work,  hasten 
to  preserve  the  good  seed  of  faith  pure  from 
the  tares  of  impiety  which  are  being  sown 
by  the  enemy. 

When,  therefore,  we  saw  that  the  follow- 
ers of  Nestorius  were  attempting  to  intro- 
duce their  impiety  into  the  church  of  God 
through  the  impious  Theodore,  who  was 
bishop  of  Mopsuestia,  and  through  his  im- 
pious writings  ;  and  moreover  through  those 
things  which  Theodoret  impiously  wrote, 
and  through  the  wicked  epistle  which  is 
said  to  have  been  written  by  Ibas  to  Maris 
the  Persian,  moved  by  all  these  sights  we 
rose  up  for  the  correction  of  what  was  going 
on,  and  assembled  in  this  royal  city  called 
thither  by  the  will  of  God  and  the  bidding 
of  the  most  religious  Emperor. 

And  because  it  happened  that  the  most 
religious  Vigilius  stopping  in  this  royal  city, 
was  present  at  all  the  discussions  with  regard 
to  the  Three  Chapters,  and  had  often  con- 
demned them  orally  and  in  writing,  neverthe- 
less afterwards  he  gave  his  consent  in  writ- 
ing to  be  present  at  the  Council  and  examine 
together  with  us  the  Three  Chapters,  that 

1  This,  of  course,  refers  to  Pope  Vigilius. 


a  suitable  definition  of  the  right  faith  might 
be  set  forth  by  us  all.  Moreover  the  most 
pious  Emperor,  according  to  what  had 
seemed  good  between  us,  exhorted  both 
him  and  us  to  meet  together,  because  it  is 
comely  that  the  priesthood  should  after 
common  discussion  impose  a  common  faith. 
On  this  account  we  besought  his  reverence 
to  fulfil  his  written  promises;  for  it  was 
not  right  that  the  scandal  with  regard  to 
these  Three  Chapters  should  go  any  further, 
and  the  Church  of  God  be  disturbed  there- 
b}-.  And  to  this  end  we  brought  to  his  re- 
membrance the  great  examples  left  us  by 
the  Apostles,  and  the  traditions  of  the  Fath- 
ers. For  although  the  grace  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  abounded  in  each  one  of  the  Apostles, 
so  that  no  one  of  them  needed  the  counsel 
of  another  in  the  execution  of  his  work,  yet 
they  were  not  willing  to  define  on  the  ques- 
tion then  raised  touching  the  circumcision 
of  the  Gentiles,  until  being  gathered  together 
they  had  confirmed  their  own  several  say- 
ings by  the  testimony  of  the  divine  Script- 
ures. 

And  thus  they  arrived  unanimously  at 
this  sentence,  which  they  wrote  to  the  Gen- 
tiles :  "It  has  seemed  good  to  the  Holy 
Ghost  and  to  us,  to  la}T  upon  you  no  other 
burden  than  these  necessary  things,  that  ye 
abstain  from  things  offered  to  idols,  and 
from  blood,  and  from  things  strangled,  and 
from  fornication." 

But  also  the  Holy  Fathers,  who  from  time 
to  time  have  met  in  the  four  holy  councils, 
following  the  example  of  the  ancients,  have 
bjr  a  common  discussion,  disposed  of  by  a 
fixed  decree  the  heresies  and  questions 
which  had  sprung  up,  as  it  was  certainly 
known,  that  by  common  discussion  when 
the  matter  in  dispute  was  presented  by  each 
side,  the  light  of  truth  expels  the  darkness 
of  falsehood. 

Nor  is  there  any  other  way  in  which  the 
truth  can  be  made  manifest  when  there  are 
discussions  concerning  the  faith,  since  each 
one  needs  the  help  of  his  neighbour,  as  we 
read  in  the  Proverbs  of  Solomon :  "  A 
brother  helping  his  brother  shall  be  exalted 
like  a  walled  city ;  and  he  shall  be  strong 


II.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  553 


307 


as  a  well-founded  kingdom;  "  and  again  in 
Ecclesiastes  he  says :  "  Two  are  better  than 
one ;  because  they  have  a  good  reward  for 
their  labour." 

So  also  the  Lord  himself  says :  "  Verily 
I  say  unto  you  that  if  two  of  you  shall  agree 
upon  earth  as  touching  anything  they  shall 
seek  for,  they  shall  have  it  from  my  Father 
which  is  in  heaven.  For  wheresoever  two 
or  three  are  gathered  together  in  my  name, 
there  am  I  in  the  midst  of  them." 

But  when  often  he  had  been  invited  by 
us  all,  and  when  the  most  glorious  judges 
had  been  sent  to  him  by  the  most  religious 
Emperor,  he  promised  to  give  sentence 
himself  on  the  Three  Chapters  (sententiam 
profevre)  :  And  when  we  heard  this  answer, 
having  the  Apostle's  admonition  in  mind, 
that  "each  one  must  give  an  account  of 
himself  to  God,"  and  fearing  the  judgment 
that  hangs  over  those  who  scandalize  one 
even  of  the  least  important,  and  knowing 
how  much  sorer  it  must  be  to  give  offence 
to  so  entirely  Christian  an  Emperor,  and  to 
the  people,  and  to  all  the  Churches ;  and 
further  recalling  what  was  said  by  God  to 
Paul :  "  Fear  not,  but  speak,  and  be  not 
silent,  for  I  am  with  thee,  and  no  one  can 
harm  thee."  Therefore,  being  gathered  to- 
gether, before  all  things  we  have  briefly 
confessed  that  we  hold  that  faith  which  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  true  God,  delivered 
to  his  holy  Apostles,  and  through  them  to 
the  holy  churches,  and  which  they  who  after 
them  were  holy  fathers  and  doctors,  handed 
down  to  the  people  credited  to  them. 

We  confessed  that  we  hold,  preserve,  and 
declare  to  the  holy  churches  that  confession 
of  faith  which  the  318  holy  Fathers  more  at 
length  set  forth,  who  were  gathered  together 
at  Nice,  who  handed  down  the  holy  matlie- 
ma  or  creed.  Moreover,  the  150  gathered 
together  at  Constantinople  set  forth  our 
faith,  who  followed  that  same  confession  of 
faith  and  explained  it.  And  the  consent  of 
the  200  holy  fathers  gathered  for  the  same 
faith  in  the  first  Council  of  Ephesus.  And 
what  things  Avere  defined  by  the  630  gathered 
at  Chalcedon  for  the  one  and  the  same  faith, 
which  they  both  followed  and  taught.  And 
all  those  who  from  time  to  time  have  been 
condemned  or  anathematized  by  the  Catho- 
lic Church,  and  by  the  aforesaid  four  Coun- 
cils, we  confessed  that  we  hold  them  con- 
demned and  anathematized.  And  when  we 
had  thus  made  profession  of  our  faith  Ave 


began  the  examination  of  the  Three  Chap- 
ters, and  first  Ave  brought  into  revieAV  the 
matter  of  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia;  and 
Avhen  all  the  blasphemies  contained  in  his 
writings  were  made  manifest,  we  marvelled 
at  the  long-suffering  of  God,  that  the  tongue 
and  mind  Avhich  had  framed  such  blasphe 
mies  Avere  not  immediately  consumed  by  the 
divine  fire ;  and  we  never  Avould  have  suf- 
fered the  reader  of  the  aforenamed  blas- 
phemies to  proceed,  fearing  [as  Ave  did]  the 
indignation  of  God  for  their  record  alone 
(as  each  blasphemy  surpassed  its  prede- 
cessor in  the  magnitude  of  its  impiety  and 
moved  from  its  foundation  the  mind  of  the 
hearer)  had  it  not  been  that  Ave  saAV  they 
avIio  gloried  in  such  blasphemies  stood  in 
need  of  the  confusion  which  would  come 
upon  them  through  their  manifestation. 
So  that  all  of  us,  moved  Avith  indignation  by 
these  blasphemies  against  God,  both  dur- 
ing and  after  the  reading,  broke  forth  into 
denunciations  and  anathematisms  against 
Theodore,  as  if  he  had  been  living  and 
present.  O  Lord  be  merciful,  we  cried,  not 
even  devils  have  dared  to  utter  such  things 
against  thee. 

O  intolerable  tongue  !  O  the  depravity 
of  the  man !  O  that  high  hand  he  lifted 
up  against  his  Creator  !  For  the  Avretched 
man  avIio  had  promised  to  know  the  Script- 
ures, had  no  recollection  of  the  words  of 
the  Prophet  Hosea,  "  Woe  unto  them  !  for 
they  have  fled  from  me :  they  are  become 
famous  because  they  Avere  impious  as  touch- 
ing me ;  they  spake  iniquities  against  me, 
and  Avhen  they  had  thought  them  out,  they 
spake  the  violent  things  against  me.  There- 
fore shall  they  fall  in  the  snare  by  reason 
of  the  Avickedness  of  their  own  tongues. 
Their  contempt  shall  turn  into  their  own 
bosom  :  because  they  have  transgressed  my 
covenant  and  have  acted  impiously  against 
my  laws." 

To  these  curses  the  impious  Theodore  is 
justly  subject.  For  the  prophecies  con- 
cerning Christ  he  rejected  and  hastened  to 
destroy,  so  far  as  he  had  the  power,  the 
great  mystery  of  the  dispensation  for  our 
salvation ;  attempting  in  many  ways  to 
shew  the  divine  words  to  be  nothing  but 
fables,  for  the  mirth  of  the  gentiles,  and 
spurned  the  other  prophetic  announce- 
ments made  against  the  impious,  especially 
that  Avhich  the  divine  Habacuc  said  of  those 
who   teach   falsely,   "  Woe  unto  him  that 


x  2 


II.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  553 


giveth  his  neighbour  drink,  that  puttest 
thy  bottle  to  him  and  makest  him  drunken 
that  thon  mayest  look  on  their  nakedness," 
that  is,  their  doctrines  full  of  darkness  and 
altogether  foreign  to  the  light. 

And  why  should  we  add  anything  further? 
For  anyone  can  take  in  his  hands  the  writ- 
ings of  the  impious  Theodore  or  the  im- 
pious chapters  which  from  his  impious 
writings  were  inserted  by  us  in  our  acts, 
and  find  the  incredible  foolishness  and  the 
detestable  things  which  he  said.  For  we 
are  afraid  to  proceed  further  and  again  to 
remember  these  infamies. 

There  was  also  read  to  vis  what  had  been 
written  by  the  holy  Fathers  against  him, 
and  his  foolishness  which  exceeded  that  of 
all  heretics,  and  moreover  the  histories  and 
the  imperial  laws,  setting  forth  his  impiety 
from  the  beginning,  and  since  after  all  these 
things  the  defenders  of  his  impiety,  glory- 
ing in  the  injuries  uttered  by  him  against 
his  Creator,  said  that  it  was  not  right  to 
anathematize  him  after  death,  although  we 
knew  the  ecclesiastical  tradition  concern- 
ing the  impious,  that  even  after  death,  here- 
tics are  anathematized;  nevertheless  we 
thought  it  necessary  concerning  this  also  to 
make  examination,  and  there  were  found  in 
the  acts  how  divers  heretics  had  been  anath- 
ematized after  death ;  and  in  many  ways 
it  was  manifest  to  us  that  those  who  were 
saying  this  cared  nothing  for  the  judgment 
of  God,  nor  for  the  Apostolic  announce- 
ments, nor  for  the  tradition  of  the  Fathers. 
And  we  would  like  to  ask  them  what  they 
have  to  say  to  the  Lord's  having  said  of 
himself  :  "  Whosoever  should  have  believed 
in  him,  is  not  judged  :  but  who  should  not 
have  believed  in  him  is  judged  alreadj^, 
because  he  hath  not  believed  in  the  name 
of  the  only  begotten  Son  of  God,"  and 
of  that  exclamation  of  the  Apostle :  Al- 
though we  or  an  angel  from  heaven  were  to 
preach  to  you  another  gospel  than  that  we 
have  preached  unto  you,  let  him  be  anath- 
ema :  as  we  have  said,  so  now  I  say  again, 
If  anyone  preach  to  you  another  gospel 
than  that  you  have  received,  let  him  be 
anathema." 

For  when  the  Lord  says  :  "he  is  judged 
already,"  and  when  the  Apostle  anathema- 
tizes even  angels,  if  they  teach  anything 
different  from  what  we  have  preached,  how 
can  even  those  who  dare  all  things,  pre- 
sume to  say  that  these  words  refer  only  to 


the  living?  or  are  they  ignorant,  or  is  it  not 
rather  that  they  feign  to  be  ignorant,  that 
the  judgment  of  anathema  is  nothing  else 
than  that  of  separation  from  God  ?  For 
the  impious  person,  although  he  may  not 
have  been  verbally  anathematized  by  any- 
one, nevertheless  he  really  is  anathema- 
tized, having  separated  himself  from  the 
true  life  by  his  impiety. 

For  what  have  they  to  answer  to  the 
Apostle  again  when  he  says,  "  A  man  that 
is  an  heretic  reject  after  the  first  and 
second  corrections.  Knowing  that  such  a 
man  is  perverse,-  and  sins,  and  is  con- 
demned by  himself." 

In  accordance  with  which  words  Cyril  of 
blessed  memory,  in  the  books  which  he 
wrote  against  Theodore,  says  as  follows  : 
They  are  to  be  avoided  who  are  in  the 
grasp  of  such  awful  crimes  whether  they  be 
among  the  quick  or  not.  For  it  is  neces- 
sary always  to  flee  from  that  which  is  hurt- 
ful, and  not  to  have  respect  of  persons,  but 
to  consider  what  is  pleasing  to  God.  And 
again  the  same  Cyril  of  holy  memory,  writ- 
ing to  John,  bishop  of  Antioch,  and  to  the 
synod  assembled  in  that  city  concerning 
Theodore  who  was  anathematized  together 
with  Nestorius,  says  thus :  It  was  there- 
fore necessary  to  keep  a  brilliant  festival, 
since  every  voice  which  agreed  with  the 
blasphemies  of  Nestorius  had  been  cast  out 
no  matter  whose.  For  it  proceeded  against 
all  those  who  held  these  same  opinions  or 
had  at  one  time  held  them,  which  is  ex- 
actly what  we  and  your  holiness  have  said  : 
We  anathematize  those  who  saj-  that  there 
are  two  Sons  and  two  Christs.  For  one  is 
he  who  is  preached  by  us  and  you,  as  Ave 
have  said,  Christ,  the  Son  and  Lord,  only 
begotten  as  man,  according  to  the  sajung- 
of  the  most  learned  Paul.  And  also  in 
his  letter  to  Alexander  and  Martinian  and 
John  and  Paregorius  and  Maximus,  pres- 
byters and  monastic  fathers,  and  those  who 
with  them  were  leading  the  solitary  life, 
he  so  says :  The  holy  synod  of  Ephesus, 
gathered  together  according  to  the  will  of 
God  against  the  Nestorian  perfidy  with  a 
just  and  keen  sentence  condemned  to- 
gether with  him  the  empty  words  of  those 
j  who  afterwards  should  embrace  or  who 
had  in  time  past  embraced  the  same 
I  opinions  with  him,  and  who  presumed  to 
say  or  write  any  such  thing,  laying  upon 
J  them  an  equal  condemnation.     For  it  fob 


II.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  553 


309 


lowed  naturally  that  when  one  was  con- 
demned for  such  profane  emptiness  of 
speech,  the  sentence  should  not  come 
against  one  only,  but  (so  to  speak)  against 
every  one  of  their  heresies  or  calumnies, 
which  they  utter  against  the  pious  doctrines 
of  the  Christ,  worshipping  two  Sons,  and 
dividing  the  indivisible,  and  bringing  in  the 
crime  of  man-worship  (anthropolatry),  both 
into  heaven  and  earth.  For  with  us  the 
holy  multitude  of  the  supernal  spirits  adore 
one  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Moreover  several 
letters  of  Augustine,  of  most  religious 
memory,  who  shone  forth  resplendent 
among  the  African  bishops,  were  read, 
shewing  that  it  was  quite  right  that  here- 
tics should  be  anathematized  after  death. 
And  this  ecclesiastical  tradition,  the  other 
most  reverend  bishops  of  Africa  have  pre- 
served :  and  the  holy  Bora  an  Church  as 
well  had  anathematized  certain  bishops 
after  their  death,  although  they  had  not 
been  accused  of  any  falling  from  the  faith 
during  their  lives  :  and  of  each  we  have  the 
evidence  in  our  hands. 

But  since  the  disciples  of  Theodore  and 
of  his  impiety,  who  are  so  manifestly  ene- 
mies of  the  truth,  have  attempted  to  bring 
forward  certain  passages  of  Cyril  of  holy 
memory  and  of  Proclus,  as  though  they  had 
been  written  in  favour  of  Theodore,  it  is 
opportune  to  fit  to  them  the  words  of  the 
prophet  when  he  says:  "The  ways  of  the 
Lord  are  right  and  the  just  walk  therein ; 
but  the  wicked  shall  be  Aveak  in  them." 
For  these,  evilly  receiving  the  things  which 
have  been  well  and  opportunely  written  by 
the  holy  Fathers,  and  making  excuses  in 
their  sins,  quote  these  words.  The  fathers 
do  not  appear  as  delivering  Theodore 
from  anathema,  but  rather  as  economical- 
ly using  certain  expressions  on  account 
of  those  who  defended  Nestorius  and 
his  impiety,  in  order  to  draw  them  away 
from  this  error,  and  to  lead  them  to  perfec- 
tion and  to  teach  them  to  condemn  not 
only  Nestorius,  the  disciple  of  the  impietj^, 
but  also  his  teacher  Theodore.  So  in  these 
very  words  of  economy  the  Fathers  shew 
their  intention  on  this  point,  that  Theodore 
should  be  anathematized,  as  has  been 
abundantly  demonstrated  by  us  in  our  acts 
from  the  writings  of  Cyril  and  Proclus  of 
holy  memory  with  regard  to  the  condem- 
nation of  Theodore  and  his  impiety.  And 
such  economy  is  found  in  divine  Scripture  : 


and  it  is  evident  that  Paid  the  Apostle 
made  use  of  this  in  the  beginning  of  his 
ministry,  in  relation  to  those  who  had  been 
brought  up  as  Jews,  and  circumcised  Timo- 
thy, that  by  this  economy  and  condescen- 
sion he  might  lead  them  on  to  perfection. 
But  afterwards  he  forbade  circumcision,  writ- 
ing thus  to  the  Galatians  :  "  Behold,  I  Paul 
say  to  you,  that  if  ye  be  circumcised  Christ 
profiteth  you  nothing."  But  we  found  that 
that  which  heretics  were  wont  to  do,  the  de- 
fenders of  Theodore  had  done  also.  For 
cutting  out  certain  of  the  things  which  the 
holy  Fathers  had  written,  and  placing  with 
them  and  mixing  up  certain  false  things  of 
their  own,  they  have  tried  by  a  letter  of 
C}rril  of  holy  memory  as  though  from  a 
testimony  of  the  Fathers,  to  free  from 
anathema  the  aforesaid  impious  Theodore  : 
in  which  very  passages  the  truth  was  de- 
monstrated, when  the  parts  which  had 
been  cut  off  were  read  in  their  proper  order, 
and  the  falsehood  was  thoroughly  evinced 
by  the  collation  of  the  true.  But  in  all 
these  things,  they  who  spake  such  vani- 
ties, "trusted  in  falsehood,"  as  it  is  writ- 
ten, "  they  trust  in  falsehood,  and  speak 
vanity ;  they  conceive  grief  and  bring 
j  forth  iniquity,  weaving  the  spider's  web." 
i  When  we  had  thus  considered  Theodore 
and  his  impiety,  we  took  care  to  have  re- 
.  cited  and  inserted  in  our  acts  a  few  of  these 
!  things  which  had  been  impiously  , written 
J  by  Theodoret  against  the  right  faith  and 
I  against  the  Twelve  Chapters  of  St.  Cyril 
and  against  the  First  Council  of  Ephesus, 
|  also  certain  things  written  by  him  in  de- 
fence of  those  impious  ones  Theodore  and 
Nestorius,  for  the  satisfaction  of  the  read- 
er ;  that  all  might  know  that  these  had  been 
justly  cast  out  and  anathematized.  In  the 
third  place  the  letter  which  is  said  to  have 
been  written  by  Ibas  to  Maris  the  Persian, 
was  brought  forward  for  examination,  and 
we  found  that  it,  too,  should  be  read. 
When  it  was  read  immediately  its  impiety 
was  manifest  to  all.  And  it  was  right  to 
make  the  condemnation  and  anathematism 
of  the  aforesaid  Three  Chapters,  as  even  to 
this  time  there  had  been  some  question  on 
the  subject.  But  because  the  defenders  of 
these  impious  ones,  Theodore  and  Nesto- 
rius, were  scheming  in  some  way  or  other 
to  confirm  these  persons  and  their  impiety, 
and  were  saying  that  this  impious  letter, 
which  praised  and  defended  Theodore  and 


310 


II.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  553 


Nestorius  and  their  impiety,  had  been  re- 
ceived by  the  holy  Council  of  Chalcedon ; 
we  thought  it  necessary  to  shew  that  the 
holy  synod  was  free  of  the  impiety  which 
was  contained  in  that  letter,  that  it  might 
be  clear  that  they  who  say  such  things  do 
not  do  so  with  the  favour  of  this  holy  coun- 
cil, but  that  through  its  name  they  may  con- 
firm their  oavu  impiety.  And  it  was  shewn 
in  the  acts  that  in  former  times  Ibas  had 
been  accused  because  of  the  very  impiety 
which  is  contained  in  this  letter ;  at  first  by 
Proclus,  of  holy  memory,  the  bishop  of 
Constantinople,  and  afterwards  by  Theodo- 
sius,  of  pious  memory,  and  by  Flavian,  who 
was  ordained  bishop  in  succession  to  Pro- 
clus, who  delegated  the  examination  of  the 
matter  to  Photius,  bishop  of  Tyre,  and  to 
Eustathius,  bishop  of  the  city  of  Beyroot. 
Afterwards  the  same  Ibas,  being  found 
guilty,  was  cast  out  of  his  bishopric.  Such 
was  the  state  of  the  case,  how  could  anyone 
presume  to  say  that  that  impious  letter  was 
received  by  the  holy  council  of  Chalcedon, 
and  that  the  holy  council  of  Chalcedon 
agreed  with  it  throughout  ?  Nevertheless, 
in  order  that  they  who  thus  calumniate  the 
holy  council  of  Chalcedon  may  have  no  fur- 
ther opportunity  of  doing  so,  Ave  ordered  to 
be  recited  the  decisions  of  the  holy  Synods, 
to  wit,  of  first  Ephesus,  and  of  Chalcedon, 
with  regard  to  the  Epistles  of  Cyril  of 
blessed  memory  and  of  Leo,  of  pious  mem- 
ory, sometime  Pope  of  Old  Rome.  And 
since  Ave  had  learned  from  these  that  noth- 
ing Avritten  by  anyone  else  ought  to  be  re- 
ceived unless  it  had  been  proved  to  agree 
Avith  the  orthodox  faith  of  the  holy  Fathers, 
Ave  interrupted  our  proceedings  so  as  to  re- 
cite also  the  definition  of  the  faith  Avhich 
Avas  set  forth  by  the  holy  council  of  Chalce- 
don, so  that  Ave  might  compare  the  things 
in  the  epistle  with  this  decree.  And  when 
this  Avas  done  it  was  perfectly  clear  that  the 
contents  of  the  epistle  Avere  wholly  oppo- 
site to  those  of  the  definition. 

For  the  definition  aoreed  Avith  the  one  and 
unchanging  faith  set  forth  as  Avell  by  the 
318  holy  Fathers  as  by  the  150  and  by 
those  avIio  assembled  at  the  first  synod  at 
Ephesus.  But  that  impious  letter,  on  the 
other  hand,  contained  the  blasphemies  of 
the  heretics  Theodore  and  Nestorius,  and 
defended  them,  and  calls  them  doctors, 
while  it  calls  the  holy  Fathers  heretics. 

And  this  Ave  made  manifest  to  all,  that 


Ave  did  not  have  any  intention  of  omitting 
the  Fathers  of  the  first  and  second  interlo- 
cutions, which  the  folloAvers  of  Theodore 
and  Nestorius  cited  on  their  side,  but  these 
and  all  the  others  having  been  read  and 
their  contents  examined,  Ave  found  that  the 
aforesaid  Ibas  Avas  not  allowed  to  be  re- 
ceived Avithout  being  compelled  to  anathe- 
matize Nestorius  and  his  impious  teachings, 
which  Avere  defended  in  that  epistle.  And 
this  the  rest  of  the  religious  bishops  of  the 
aforesaid  holy  Council  did  as  well  as  those 
two  Avhose  interlocutions  certain  tried  to 
use. 

For  this  they  observed  in  the  case  of 
Theodoret,  and  required  him  to  anathema- 
tize those  things  of  which  he  Avas  accused. 
If  therefore  they  Avere  Avilling  to  alloAv  the 
reception  of  Ibas  in  no  other  manner  unless 
he  condemned  the  impiety  Avhich  was  con- 
tained in  his  letters,  and  subscribed  the 
definition  of  faith  adopted  by  the  Council, 
how  can  they  attempt  to  make  out  that  this 
impious  letter  was  receiA'ed  by  the  same 
holy  council  ?  For  we  are  taught,  "  "What 
felloAvship  hath  righteousness  with  un- 
righteousness ?  and  Avhat  communion  hath 
light  with  darkness?  And  Avhat  concord 
hath  Christ  with  Belial?  Or  what  part 
hath  he  that  believeth  with  an  infidel  ? 
And  what  agreement  hath  the  temple  of 
God  with  idols." 

Having  thus  detailed  all  that  has  been 
done  by  us,  Ave  again  confess  that  we 
receive  the  four  holy  Synods,  that  is,  the 
Nicene,  the  Constantinopolitan,  the  first  of 
Ephesus,  and  that  of  Chalcedon,  and  Ave 
have  taught,  and  do  teach  all  that  they 
defined  respecting  the  one  faith.  And  Ave 
account  those  who  do  not  receive  these 
thiugs  aliens  from  the  Catholic  Church. 
Moreover  we  condemn  and  anathematize, 
together  with  all  the  other  heretics  Avho 
haAre  been  condemned  and  anathematized 
by  the  before-mentioned  four  holy  Synods, 
and  by  the  holy  Catholic  and  Apostolic 
Church,  Theodore  who  was  Bishop  of 
Mopsuestia,  and  his  impious  Avritings,  and 
also  those  things  which  Theodoret  im- 
piously Avrote  against  the  right  faith,  and 
against  the  Twelve  Chapters  of  the  holy 
Cyril,  and  against  the  first  Synod  of  Ephe- 
sus, and  also  those  Avhich  he  wrote  in 
defence  of  Theodore  and  Nestorius.  In 
addition  to  these  we  also  anathematize  the 
impious  Epistle  which  Ibas  is  said  to  haA-e 


II.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  553 


311 


written  to  Maris,  the  Persian,  winch  denies 
that  God  the  Word  was  incarnate  of  the 
holy  Mother  of  God,  and  ever  Virgin  Mary, 
and  accuses  Cyril  of  holy  memory,  who 
taught  the  truth,  as  an  heretic,  and  of  the 
same  sentiments  with  Apollinaris,  and 
blames  the  first  Synod  of  Ephesus  as 
deposing  Nestorius  without  examination 
and  inquiry,  and  calls  the  Twelve  Chapters 
of  the  holy  Cyril  impious,  and  contrary  to 
the  right  faith,  and  defends  Theodoras  and 
Nestorius,  and  their  impious  dogmas  and 
writings.  We  therefore  anathematize  the 
Three  Chapters  before-mentioned,  that  is, 
the  impious  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  with 
his  execrable  writings,  and  those  things 
which  Theodoret  impiously  wrote,  and  the 
impious  letter  which  is  said  to  be  of  Ibas, 
and  their  defenders,  and  those  who  have 
written  or  do  write  in  defence  of  them,  or 
who  dare  to  say  that  they  are  correct,  and 
who  have  defended  or  attempt  to  defend 
their  impiety  with  the  names  of  the  holy 
Fathers,  or  of  the  holy  Council  of  Chalce- 
don.  These  things  therefore  being  settled 
with  all  accuracy,  we,  bearing  in  remem- 
brance the  promises  made  respecting  the 


holy  Church,  and  who  it  was  that  said  that 
the  gates  of  hell  should  not  prevail  against 
her,  that  is,  the  deadly  tongues  of  heretics ; 
remembering  also  Avhat  was  prophesied 
respecting  it  by  Hosca,  sa}'ing,  "I  will 
betroth  thee  unto  me  in  faithfulness,  and 
thou  shalt  know  the  Lord,"  and  numbering 
together  with  the  devil,  the  father  of  lies, 
the  unbridled  tongues  of  heretics  who  per- 
severed in  their  impiety  unto  death,  and 
their  most  impious  writings,  will  say  to 
them,  "  Behold,  all  ye  kindle  a  fire,  and 
cause  the  flame  of  the  fire  to  grow  strong, 
ye  shall  walk  in  the  light  of  your  fire,  and 
the  flame  which  ye  kindle."  But  we,  hav- 
ing a  commandment  to  exhort  the  people 
with  right  doctrine,  and  to  speak  to  the 
heart  of  Jerusalem,  that  is,  the  Church  of 
God,  do  rightly  make  haste  to  sow  in 
righteousness,  and  to  reap  the  fruit  of  life ; 
and  kindling  for  ourselves  the  light  of 
knowledge  from  the  holy  Scriptures,  and 
the  doctrine  of  the  Fathers,  we  have  con- 
sidered it  necessary  to  comprehend  in  cer- 
tain Capitula,  both  the  declaration  of  the 
truth,  and  the  condemnation  of  heretics, 
and  of  their  wickedness. 


THE  CAPITTJLA  OF  THE  COUNCIL. 

(Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  V.,  col.  568.) 

I. 

If  anyone  shall  not  confess  that  the  nature  or  essence  of  the  Father,  of  the  Son,  and 
of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  one,  as  also  the  force  and  the  power  ;  [if  anyone  does  not  confess] 
a  consubstantial  Trinity,  one  Godhead  to  be  worshipped  in  three  subsistences  or  Persons  : 
let  him  be  anathema.  For  there  is  but  one  God  even  the  Father  of  whom  are  all  things, 
and  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ  through  whom  are  all  things,  and  one  Holy  Spirit  in  whom  are 
all  things. 

II. 

If  anyone  shall  not  confess  that  the  Word  of  God  has  two  nativities,  the  one  from 
all  eternity  of  the  Father,  Avithout  time  and  without  body  ;  the  other  in  these  last  days, 
coming  down  from  heaven  and  being  made  flesh  of  the  holy  and  glorious  Mary,  Mother 
of  God  and  always  a  virgin,  and  born  of  her  :  let  him  be  anathema. 

HI. 

If  anyone  shall  say  that  the  wonder-working  Word  of  God  is  one  [Person]  and  the 
Christ  that  suffered  another  ;  or  shall  say  that  God  the  Word  was  with  the  woman-born 
Christ,  or  was  in  him  as  one  person  in  another,  but  that  he  was  not  one  and  the  same 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Word  of  God,  incarnate  and  made  man,  and  that  his  miracles 
and  the  sufferings  which  of  his  own  will  he  endured  in  the  flesh  were  not  of  the  same 
[Person] :  let  him  be  anathema. 

IV. 

If  anyone  shall  say  that  the  union  of  the  Word  of  God  to  man  was  only  according  to 
grace  or  energy,  or  dignity,  or  equality  of  honour,  or  authority,  or  relation,  or  effect,  or 
power,  or  according  to  good  pleasure  in  this  sense  that  God  the  Word  was  pleased  with 
a  man,  that  is  to  say,  that  he  loved  him  for  his  own  sake,  as  says  the  senseless  Theodo- 
ras, or  [if  anyone  pretends  that  this  union  exists  only]  so  far  as  likeness  of  name  is  con- 
cerned, as  the  Nestorians  understand,  Avho  call  also  the  Word  of  God  Jesns  and  Christ,  and 
even  accord  to  the  man  the  names  of  Christ  and  of  Son,  speaking  thus  clearly  of  two  per- 
sons, and  only  designating  disingenuously  one  Person  and  one  Christ  when  the  reference 
is  to  his  honour,  or  his  dignity,  or  his  worship  ;  if  anyone  shall  not  acknowledge  as  the 
Holy  Fathers  teach,  that  the  union  of  God  the  Word  is  made  with  the  flesh  animated 
by  a  reasonable  and  living  soul,  and  that  such  union  is  made  synthetically  and  hypostat- 
ically,  and  that  therefore  there  is  only  one  Person,  to  wit :  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  one 
of  the  Holy  Trinity :  let  him  be  anathema.  As  a  matter  of  fact  the  word  "  union  " 
(tt}?  tvmem)  has  many  meanings,  and  the  partisans  of  Apollinaris  and  Eutyches  have 
affirmed  that  these  natures  are  confounded  inter  se,  and  have  asserted  a  union  produced 
by  the  mixture  of  both.  On  the  other  hand  the  followers  of  Theodoras  and  of  Nestorius 
rejoicing  in  the  division  of  the  natures,  have  taught  only  a  relative  union.  Meanwhile 
the  Holy  Church  of  God,  condemning  equally  the  impiety  of  both  sorts  of  heresies, 
recognises  the  union  of  God  the  Word  with  the  flesh  synthetically,  that  is  to  say,  hypo- 
statically.  For  in  the  mystery  of  Christ  the  synthetical  union  not  only  preserves  un- 
confusedly  the  natures  which  are  united,  but  also  allows  no  separation. 

V. 

If  anyone  understands  the  expression  "  one  only  Person  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ " 
in  this  sense,  that  it  is  the  union  of  many  hypostases,  and  if  he  attempts  thus  to  intro- 
duce into  the  mystery  of  Christ  two  hypostases,  or  two  Persons,  and,  after  having  intro- 


II.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  553  313 

duced  two  persons,  speaks  of  one  Person  only  out  of  dignity,  honour  or  worship,  as  both 
Theodoras  and  Nestorius  insanely  have  written ;  if  anyone  shall  calumniate  the  holy 
Council  of  Chalcedon,  pretending  that  it  made  use  of  this  expression  [one  hypostasis]  in 
this  impious  sense,  and  if  he  will  not  recognize  rather  that  the  Word  of  God  is  united 
with  the  flesh  hypostatically,  and  that  therefore  there  is  but  one  hypostasis  or  one  only 
Person,  and  that  the  holy  Council  of  Chalcedon  has  professed  in  this  sense  the  one 
Person  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ :  let  him  be  anathema.  For  since  one  of  the  Holy 
Trinity  has  been  made  man,  viz.:  God  the  Word,  the  Holy  Trinity  has  not  been  in- 
creased by  the  addition  of  another  person  or  hypostasis. 

VI. 

If  anyone  shall  not  call  in  a  true  acceptation,  but  only  in  a  false  acceptation,  the 
holy,  glorious,  and  ever- virgin  Mary,  the  Mother  of  God,  or  shall  call  her  so  only  in  a 
relative  sense,  believing  that  she  bare  only  a  simple  man  and  that  God  the  word  was  not 
incarnate  of  her,  but  that  the  incarnation  of  God  the  Word  resulted  only  from  the  fact 
that  he  united  himself  to  that  man  who  Avas  born  [of  her]  ; x  if  he  shall  calumniate  the 
Holy  Synod  of  Chalcedon  as  though  it  had  asserted  the  Virgin  to  be  Mother  of  God 
according  to  the  impious  sense  of  Theodore ;  or  if  anyone  shall  call  her  the  mother  of  a 
man  (av&panroToicov)  or  the  Mother  of  Christ  (XptaroTOKOv),  as  if  Christ  were  not  God, 
and  snail  not  confess  that  she  is  exactly  and  truly  the  Mother  of  God,  because  that  God 
the  Word  who  before  all  ages  was  begotten  of  the  Father  was  in  these  last  days  made 
flesh  and  born  of  her,  and  if  anyone  shall  not  confess  that  in  this  sense  the  holy  Synod 
of  Chalcedon  acknowledged  her  to  be  the  Mother  of  God :  let  him  be  anathema. 

VII. 

If  anyone  using  the  expression,  "  in  two  natures,"  does  not  confess  that  our  one  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  has  been  revealed  in  the  divinity  and  in  the  humanity,  so  as  to  designate 
by  that  expression  a  difference  of  the  natures  of  which  an  ineffable  union  is  unconfusedly 
made,  [a  union]  in  which  neither  the  nature  of  the  Word  was  changed  into  that  of  the 
flesh,  nor  that  of  the  flesh  into  that  of  the  Word,  for  each  remained  that  it  was  by 
nature,  the  union  being  hypostatic ;  but  shall  take  the  expression  with  regard  to  the 
mystery  of  Christ  in  a  sense  so  as  to  divide  the  parties,  or  recognising  the  two  natures 
in  the  only  Lord  Jesus,  God  the  Word  made  man,  does  not  content  himself  with  taking 
in  a  theoretical  manner 2  the  difference  of  the  natures  which  compose  him,  which  differ- 
ence is  not  destroyed  by  the  union  between  them,  for  one  is  composed  of  the  two  and 
the  two  are  in  one,  but  shall  make  use  of  the  number  [two]  to  divide  the  natures  or  to 
make  of  them  Persons  properly  so  called  :  let  him  be  anathema.3 

VIII. 

If  anyone  uses  the  expression  "  of  two  natures,"  confessing  that  a  union  was  made 
of  the  Godhead  and  of  the  humanity,  or  the  expression  "the  one  nature  made  flesh  of 
God  the  Word,"  and  shall  not  so  understand  those  expressions  as  the  holy  Fathers  have 
taught,  to  wit :  that  of  the  divine  and  human  nature  there  was  made  an  hypostatic 
union,  whereof  is  one  Christ ;  but  from  these  expressions  shall  try  to  introduce  one 
nature  or  substance  [made  by  a  mixture]  of  the  Godhead  and  manhood  of  Christ ;  let  him 
be  anathema.  For  in  teaching  that  the  only-begotten  Word  was  united  hypostatically 
[to  humanity]  we  do  not  mean  to  say  that  there  was  made  a  mutual  confusion  of  natures, 
but  rather  each  [nature]  remaining  what  it  was,  we  understand  that  the  Word  was 
united  to  the  flesh.  Wherefore  there  is  one  Christ,  both  God  and  man,  consubstantial 
with  the  Father  as  touching  his  Godhead,  and  consubstantial  with  us  as  touching  his 

1  The  test  here  is  uncertain,  and  the  Latin  and  Greek  do  not  |  2  T.  «.,  "  as  an  abstraction  (rij  0aapi<f  novy)." 

Bgree.     Vide  Hefele.  |  » The  text  here  is  uncertain. ' 


314 


II.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  553 


manhood.  Therefore  they  are  equally  condemned  and  anathematized  by  the  Church  of 
God,  who  divide  or  part  the  mystery  of  the  divine  dispensation  of  Christ,  or  who  intro- 
duce confusion  into  that  mystery. 

IX. 

If  anyone  shall  take  the  expression,  Christ  ought  to  be  worshipped  in  his  two 
natures,  in  the  sense  that  he  wishes  to  introduce  thus  two  adorations,  the  one  in  special 
relation  to  God  the  Word  and  the  other  as  pertaining  to  the  man  ;  or  if  anyone  to  get 
rid  of  the  flesh,  [that  is  of  the  humanity  of  Christ,]  or  to  mix  together  the  divinity  and 
the  humanity,  shall  speak  monstrously  of  one  only  nature  or  essence  (cpvatv  ijyovv  ovaiav) 
of  the  united  (natures),  and  so  worship  Christ,  and  does  not  venerate,  by  one  adoration, 
God  the  Word  made  man,  together  with  his  flesh,  as  the  Holy  Church  has  taught  from 
the  beginning :  let  him  be  anathema. 

X. 

If  anyone  does  not  confess  that  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  who  was  crucified  in  the  flesh 
is  true  God  and  the  Lord  of  Glory  and  one  of  the  Holy  Trinity :  let  him  be  anathema. 


XI. 

If  anyone  does  not  anathematize  Arius,  Eunomius,  Macedonius,  Apollinaris,  Nesto- 
rius,  Eutyches  and  Origen,  as  well  as  their  impious  writings,  as  also  all  other  heretics 
already  condemned  and  anathematized  by  the  Holy  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church,  and 
by  the  aforesaid  four  Holy  Synods  and  [if  anyone  does  not  equally  anathematize]  all 
those  who  have  held  and  hold  or  who  in  their  impiety  persist  in  holding  to  the  end  the 
same  opinion  as  those  heretics  just  mentioned :  let  him  be  anathema. 


NOTES. 


Hefele. 


(Hist.  Councils,  Vol.  iv.,  p.  336.) 

Halloix,  Gamier,  Basnage,  Walch  and  others 
suppose,  and  Vincenzi  maintains  with  great 
zeal,  that  the  name  of  Origen  is  a  later  insertion 
in  this  anathematism,  because  (a)  Theodore 
Ascidas,  the  Origenist,  was  one  of  the  most 
influential  members  of  the  Synod,  and  would 
certainly  have  prevented  a  condemnation  of 
Origen  ;  further,  (b)  because  in  this  anathe- 
matism only  such  heretics  Avould  be  named  as 
had  been  condemned  hy  one  of  the  first  four 
Ecumenical  Synods,  which  was  not  the  case 
with  Origen  ;  (c)  because  this  anathematism 
is  identical  with  the  tenth  in  the  6fxo\oyia  of 
the  Emperor,  but  in  the  latter  the  name  of 
Origen  is  lacking  ;  and,  finally,  (d)  because 
Origen  does  not  belong  to  the  group  of  here- 
tics to  whom  this  anathematism  refers.  His 
errors  were  quite  different. 

All  these  considerations  seem  to  me  of  in- 
sufficient strength,  or  mere  conjecture,  to 
make  an  alteration  in  the  text,  and  arbitrarily 
to  remove  the  name  of  Origen.  As  regards 
the  objection  in  connection  with  Theodore 
Ascidas,  it  is  known  that  the  latter  had  al- 
ready pronounced  a  formal  anathema  on  Ori- 
gen, and  certainly  he  did  the  same  this  time, 


if  the  Emperor  wished  it  or  if  it  seemed  ad- 
visable. The  second  and  fourth  objections 
have  little  weight.  In  regard  to  the  third  (c) 
it  is  quite  possible  that  either  the  Emperor 
subsequently  went  further  than  in  his  6/xoAo- 
yi'a,  or  that  the  bishops  at  the  fifth  Synod,  of 
their  own  accord,  added  Origen,  led  on  per- 
haps by  one  or  another  anti-Origenist  of  their 
number.  What,  however,  chiefly  determines 
us  to  the  retention  of  the  text  is  :  (a)  that  the 
copy  of  the  synodal  Acts  extant  in  the  Roman 
archives,  which  has  the  highest  credibility, 
and  was  probably  prepared  for  Vigilius  him- 
self, contains  the  name  of  Origen  in  the  elev- 
enth anathematism ;  and  (b)  that  the  monks 
of  the  new  Lama  in  Palestine,  who  are  known 
to  have  been  zealous  Origenists,  withdrew 
Church  communion  from  the  bishops  of  Pales- 
tine after  these  had  subscribed  the  Acts  of 
the  fifth  Synod.  In  the  anathema  on  the  Three 
Chapters  these  Origenists  could  find  as  little 
ground  for  such  a  rupture  as  their  friends  and 
former  colleague  Ascidas  ;  it  could  only  be  by 
the  synod  attacking  their  darling  Origen.  (c) 
Finally,  only  on  the  ground  that  the  name  of 
Origen  really  stood  in  the  eleventh  anathe- 
matism, can  we  explain  the  widely-circulated 
ancient  rumour  that  our  Synod  anathematized 
Origen  and  the  Origenists. 


II.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  553  315 

XII. 

If  anyone  defends  the  impious  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  who  has  said  that  the  Word 
of  God  is  one  person,  but  that  another  person  is  Christ,  vexed  by  the  sufferings  of  the 
soul  and  the  desires  of  the  flesh,  and  separated  little  by  little  above  that  which  is  infe- 
rior, and  become  better  by  the  progress  in  good  works  and  irreproachable  in  his  manner 
of  life,  as  a  mere  man  was  baptized  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of 
the  Holy  Ghost,  and  obtained  by  this  baptism  the  grace  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  became 
worthy  of  Sonship,  and  to  be  worshipped  out  of  regard  to  the  Person  of  God  the  Word 
(just  as  one  worships  the  image  of  an  emperor)  and  that  he  is  become,  after  the  resur- 
rection, unchangeable  in  his  thoughts  and  altogether  without  sin.  And,  again,  this  same 
impious  Theodore  has  also  said  that  the  union  of  God  the  Word  with  Christ  is  like  to 
that  which,  according  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Apostle,  exists  between  a  man  and  his  wife, 
"They  twain  shall  be  in  one  flesh."  The  same  [Theodore]  has  dared,  among  numerous 
other  blasphemies,  to  say  that  when  after  the  resurrection  the  Lord  breathed  upon  his 
disciples,  saying,  "  Receive  the  Holy  Ghost,"  he  did  not  really  give  them  the  Holy 
Spirit,  but  that  he  breathed  upon  them  only  as  a  sign.  He  likeAvise  has  said  that  the 
profession  of  faith  made  by  Thomas  when  he  had,  after  the  resurrection,  touched  the 
hands  and  the  side  of  the  Lord,  viz. :  "  My  Lord  and  my  God,"  was  not  said  in  reference 
to  Christ,  but  that  Thomas,  filled  with  wonder  at  the  miracle  of  the  resurrection,  thus 
thanked  God  who  had  raised  up  Christ.  And  moreover  (which  is  still  more  scandalous) 
this  same  Theodore  in  his  Commentary  on  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  compares  Christ  to 
Plato,  Manickaeus,  Epicurus  and  Marcion,  and  says  that  as  each  of  these  men  having 
discovered  his  own  doctrine,  had  given  his  name  to  his  disciples,  who  were  called  Platon- 
ists,  Manicheans,  Epicureans  and  Marcionites,  just  so  Christ,  having  discovered  his  doc- 
trine, had  given  the  name  Christians  to  his  disciples.  If,  then,  anyone  shall  defend  this 
most  impious  Theodore  and  his  impious  writings,  in  which  he  vomits  the  blasphemies 
mentioned  above,  and  countless  others  besides  against  our  Great  God  and  Saviour  Jesus 
Christ,  and  if  anyone  does  not  anathematize  him  or  his  impious  writings,  as  well  as  all 
those  who  protect  or  defend  him,  or  who  assert  that  his  exegesis  is  orthodox,  or  who 
write  in  favour  of  him  and  of  his  impious  works,  or  those  who  share  the  same  opinions,  or 
those  who  have  shared  them  and  still  continue  unto  the  end  in  this  heresy :  let  him  be 
anathema. 

XIII. 

If  anyone  shall  defend  the  impious  Avritings  of  Theodoret,  directed  against  the  true 
faith  and  against  the  first  holy  Synod  of  Ephesus  and  against  St.  Cyril  and  his  XII. 
Anathemas,  and  [defends]  that  which  he  has  written  in  defence  of  the  impious  Theodore 
and  Nestorius,  and  of  others  having  the  same  opinions  as  the  aforesaid  Theodore  and  Nes- 
torius,  if  anyone  admits  them  or  their  impiety,  or  shall  give  the  name  of  impious  to  the 
doctors  of  the  Church  who  profess  the  hypostatic  union  of  God  the  Word  ;  and  if  any- 
one does  not  anathematize  these  impious  writings  and  those  who  have  held  or  who  hold 
these  sentiments,  and  all  those  who  have  written  contrary  to  the  true  faith  or  against 
St.  Cyril  and  his  XII.  Chapters,  and  Avho  die  in  their  impiety :  let  him  be  anathema. 

XIV. 

If  anyone  shall  defend  that  letter  which  Ibas  is  said  to  have  written  to  Maris  the 
Persian,  in  Avhich  he  denies  that  the  Word  of  God  incarnate  of  Mary,  the  Holy  Mother 
of  God  and  ever-virgin,  was  made  man,  but  says  that  a  mere  man  was  born  of  her,  whom 
he  styles  a  Temple,  as  though  the  Word  of  God  was  one  Person  and  the  man  another 
person ;  in  which  letter  also  he  reprehends  St.  Cyril  as  a  heretic,  Avhen  he  teaches  the 
right  faith  of  Christians,  and  charges  him  with  writing  things  like  to  the  wicked  Apollinaris. 
In  addition  to  this  he  vituperates  the  First  Holy  Council  of  Ephesus,  affirming  that  it 
deposed  Nestorius  without  discrimination  and  Avithout  examination.  The  aforesaid  im- 
pious epistle  styles  the  XII.  Chapters  of  Cyril  of  blessed  memory,  impious  and  contrary 


316  II.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  553 


to  the  right  faith  find  defends  Theodore  and-  Nestorius  and  their  impious  teachings  and 
writings.  If  anyone  therefore  shall  defend  the  aforementioned  epistle  and  shall  not 
anathematize  it  and  those  who  defend  it  and  say  that  it  is  right  or  that  a  part  of  it  is 
right,  or  if  anyone  shall  defend  those  who  have  written  or  shall  write  in  its  favour,  or  in 
defence  of  the  impieties  which  are  contained  in  it,  as  well  as  those  who  shall  presume 
to  defend  it  or  the  impieties  which  it  contains  in  the  name  of  the  Holy  Fathers  or  of 
the  Holy  Synod  of  Chalcedon,  and  shall  remain  in  these  offences  unto  the  end :  let  him 
be  anathema. 


EXCURSUS  ON  THE  XV.  ANATHEMAS  AGAINST  ORIGEN. 

That  Origen  was  condemned  by  name  in  the  Eleventh  Canon  of  this  council  there  seems 
no  possible  reason  to  doubt.  I  have  given  in  connexion  with  that  canon  a  full  discussion  of 
the  evidence  upon  which  our  present  text  rests.  But  there  arises  a  further  question,  to 
wit,  Did  the  Fifth  Synod  examine  the  case  of  Origen  and  finally  adopt  the  XV.  Anathemas 
against  him  which  are  usually  found  assigned  to  it  ?  It  would  seem  that  with  the  evidence 
now  in  our  possession  it  would  be  the  height  of  rashness  to  give  a  dogmatic  answer  to  this 
question.  Scholars  of  the  highest  repute  have  taken,  and  do  take  to-day,  the  opposite  sides 
of  the  case,  and  each  defends  his  own  side  with  marked  learning  and  ability.  To  my  mind 
the  chief  difficulty  in  supposing  these  anathematisms  to  have  been  adopted  by  the  Fifth 
Ecumenical  is  that  nothing  whatever  is  said  about  Origen  in  the  call  of  the  council,  nor  in 
any  of  the  letters  written  in  connexion  with  it ;  all  of  which  would  seem  unnatural  had  there 
been  a  long  discussion  upon  the  matter,  and  had  such'  an  important  dogmatic  definition 
been  adopted  as  the  XV.  Anathemas,  and  yet  on  the  other  hand  there  is  a  vast  amount  of 
literature  subsequent  in  date  to  the  council  which  distinctly  attributes  a  detailed  and  care- 
ful examination  of  the  teaching  of  Origen  and  a  formal  condemnation  of  him  and  of  it  to 
this  council. 

The  XV.  Anathemas  as  we  now  have  them  were  discovered  by  Peter  Lambeck,  the  Libra- 
rian of  Vienna,  in  the  XVIIth  century  ;  and  bear,  in  the  Vienna  MS.,  the  heading,  "  Canons 
of  the  165  holy  Fathers  of  the  holy  fifth  Synod,  held  in  Constantinople."  But  despite  this, 
Walch  (Kcherhist.,  Vol.  vri.,  p.  661  et  seqq.  and  671  ;  Vol.  viij.,  p.  281  ct  scqq.)  ;  Dollinger 
(Church  History,  Eng.  Trans.,  Vol.  v.,  p.  203  ct  scqq.)  ;  Hefele  (Hist.  Councils,  Vol.  iv.,  p.  221 
sq.),  and  many  others  look  upon  this  caption  as  untrustworthy.  Evagrius,  the  historian,  dis- 
tinctly says  that  Origen  was  condemned  with  special  anathemas  at  this  Council,  but  his  evi- 
dence is  likewise  (and,  as  it  seems  to  me,  too  peremptorily)  set  aside. 

Cardinal  Noris,  in  his  Dissertatio  Historica  de  Synodo  Quinta,  is  of  opinion  that  Origen 
was  twice  condemned  by  the  Fifth  Synod  ;  the  first  time  by  himself  before  the  eight  sessions 
of  which  alone  the  acts  remain,  and  again  after  those  eight  sessions,  in  connexion  with  two 
of  his  chief  followers,  Didymus  the  Blind  and  the  deacon  Evagrius.  The  Jesuit,  John  Gar- 
nier  wrote  in  opposition  to  Noris ;  but  his  work,  while  exceedingly  clever,  is  considered  by 
the  learned  to  contain  (as  Hefele  says)  "many  statements  [which]  are  rash,  arbitrary,  and 
inaccurate,  and  on  the  whole  it  is  seen  to  be  written  in  a  spirit  of  opposition  to  Noris." l  In 
defence  of  Noris's  main  contention  came  forward  the  learned  Ballerini  brothers,  of  Verona. 
In  their  Defemio  dissertationis  Norisiance  dc  Syn.  V.  adv.  diss.  P.  Garnerii,  they  expand  and 
amend  Noris's  hypothesis.  But  after  all  is  said  the  matter  remains  involved  in  the  great- 
est obscurity,  and  it  is  far  easier  to  bring  forward  objections  to  the  arguments  in  defence 
of  either  view  than  to  bring  forward  a  theory  which  will  satisfy  all  the  conditions  of  the 
problem. 

'  Hefele,  Hist,  Councils,  Vol.  IV.,  p.  230,  tots. 


II.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  553  317 

Those  who  deny  that  the  XV.  Anathemas  were  adopted  by  the  Fifth  Synod  agree  in 
assigning  them  to  the  "Home  Synod," that  is  a  Synod  at  Constantinople  of  the  bishops  sub- 
ject to  it,  in  a.d.  543.  Hefele  takes  this  view  and  advocates  it  with  much  cogency,  but  con- 
fesses frankly,  "  We  certainly  possess  no  strong  and  decisive  proof  that  the  fifteen  anathe- 
matisms  belong  to  the  Constantinopolitan  synod  of  the  year  543  ;  but  some  probable  grounds 
for  the  opinion  may  be  adduced.1  This  appears  to  be  a  somewhat  weak  statement  with 
which  to  overthrow  so  much  evidence  as  there  can  be  produced  for  the  opposite  view.  For 
the  traditional  view  the  English  reader  will  find  a  complete  defence  in  E.  B.  Pusey,  What  is 
of  Faith  with  regard  to  Eternal  Punishment? 

Before  closing  it  will  be  well  to  call  the  attention  of  the  reader  to  these  words  now  found 
in  the  acts  as  we  have  them  : 

"  And  we  found  that  many  others  had  been  anathematised  after  death,  also  even  Origen  ; 
and  if  any  one  were  to  go  back  to  the  times  of  Theophilus  of  blessed  memory  or  further  he 
would  have  found  him  anathematised  after  death  ;  which  also  now  your  holiness  and  Vigil- 
ius,  the  most  religious  Pope  of  Old  Rome  has  done  in  his  case."  2  It  would  seem  that  this 
cannot  possibly  refer  to  anything  else  than  a  condemnation  of  Origen  by  the  Fifth  Ecumen- 
ical Synod,  and  so  strongly  is  Vincenzi,  Origen's  defender,  impressed  with  this  that  he  de- 
clares the  passage  to  have  been  tampered  with.  But  even  if  these  anathemas  were  adopted 
at  the  Home  Synod  before  the  meeting  of  the  Fifth  Ecumenical,  it  is  clear  that  by  including 
his  name  among  those  of  the  heretics  in  the  Xlth  Canon,  it  practically  ratified  and  made  its 
own  the  action  of  that  Synod. 

The  reader  will  be  glad  to  know  Harnack's  judgment  in  this  matter.  Writing  of  the 
Fifth  Council,  he  says  :  "  It  condemned  Origen,  as  Justinian  desired  ;  it  condemned  the 
Three  Chapters  and  consequently  the  Antiochene  theology,  as  Justinian  desired,"  etc.,  and 
in  a  foot-note  he  explains  that  he  agrees  with  "  Noris,  the  Ballerini,  Moller  (R.  Encykl.,  xi., 
p.  113)  and  Loofs  (pp.  287,  291)  as  against  Hefele  and  Vincenzi."  3  A  few  pages  before,  he 
speaks  of  this  last  author's  book  as  "  a  big  work  which  falsifies  history  to  justify  the  theses 
of  Halloix,  to  rehabilitate  Origen  and  Vigilius,  and  on  the  other  hand  to  *  remodel '  the 
Council  and  partly  to  bring  it  into  contempt." d  Further  on  he  says  :  "  The  fifteen  anathe- 
mas against  Origen,  on  which  his  condemnation  at  the  council  was  based,  contained  the  fol- 
lowing points.  .  .  .  Since  the  '  Three  Chapters  '  were  condemned  at  the  same  time,  Ori- 
gen and  Theodore  were  both  got  rid  of.  .  .  .  Origen's  doctrines  of  the  consummation, 
and  of  spirits  and  matter  might  no  longer  be  maintained.  The  judgment  was  restored  to 
its  place,  and  got  back  even  its  literal  meaning."  5 

i  Hefele,  Hist.  Councils,  Vol.  IV.,  p.  223.  1      '■•  Harnack.    nisi  of  Dogma,  Vol.  IV.,  p.  249  (Eug.  Trans . ). 

2  Speech  of  Aseirias  in  the  V.  Session.  |     *  Ibid.,  p.  245,  note  2.  6  Ibid.,  p .  349. 


THE  ANATHEMAS  AGAINST  OPJGEN. 


If  anyone  asserts  the  fabulous  pre-exist- 
ence  of  souls,  and  shall  assert  the  mon- 
strous restoration  which  follows  from  it : 
let  him  be  anathema. 

II. 

If  anyone  shall  say  that  the  creation  (rr)v 
Trapayoyyyv)  of  all  reasonable  things  in- 
cludes only  intelligences  (vows)  without 
bodies  and  altogether  immaterial,  having 
neither  number  nor  name,  so  that  there  is 
unity  between  them  all  by  identity  of  sub- 
stance, force  and  energy,  and  by  their  union 
with  and  knowledge  of  God  the  Word  ;  but 
that  no  longer  desiring  the  sight  of  God, 
they  gave  themselves  over  to  worse  things, 
each  one  following  his  own  inclinations, 
and  that  they  have  taken  bodies  more  or 
less  subtile,  and  have  received  names,  for 
among  the  heavenly  Powers  there  is  a  dif- 
ference of  names  as  there  is  also  a  difference 
of  bodies ;  and  thence  some  became  and  are 
called  Cherubims,  others  Seraphims,  and 
Principalities,  and  Powers,  and  Domina- 
tions, and  Thrones,  and  Angels,  and  as 
many  other  heavenly  orders  as  there  may 
be  :  let  him  be  anathema. 

III. 

If  anyone  shall  say  that  the  sun,  the 
moon  and  the  stars  are  also  reasonable 
beings,  and  that  they  have  only  become 
what  they  are  because  they  turned  towards 
evil :  let  him  be  anathema. 

IV. 

If  anyone  shall  say  that  the  reasonable 
creatures  in  whom  the  divine  love  had 
grown  cold  have  been  hidden  in  gross  bod- 
ies such  as  ours,  and  have  been  called  men, 
while  those  who  have  attained  the  lowest 
degree  of  wickedness  have  shared  cold  and 
obscure  bodies  and  are  become  and  called 
demons  and  evil  spirits  :  let  him  be  anath- 
ema. 

V. 

If  anyone  shall  say  that  a  psychic 
(yfrvxiicyv)   condition    has    come    from    an 


angelic  or  archangelic  state,  and  moreover 
that  a  demoniac  and  a  human  condition 
has  come  from  a  psychic  condition,  and 
that  from  a  human  state  they  may  become 
again  angels  and  demons,  and  that  each 
order  of  heavenly  virtues  is  either  all  from 
those  below  or  from  those  above,  or  from 
those  above  and  below :  let  him  be  anath- 
ema. 

VI. 

If  anyone  shall  say  that  there  is  a  two- 
fold race  of  demons,  of  which  the  one 
includes  the  souls  of  men  and  the  other  the 
superior  spirits  who  fell  to  this,  and  that 
of  all  the  number  of  reasonable  beings 
there  is  but  one  which  has  remained 
unshaken  in  the  love  and  contemplation 
of  God,  and  that  that  spirit  is  become 
Christ  and  the  king  of  all  reasonable 
beings,  and  that  he  has  created1  all  the 
bodies  which  exist  in  heaven,  on  earth, 
and  between  heaven  and  earth ;  and 
that  the  world  which  has  in  itself  ele- 
ments more  ancient  than  itself,  and  which 
exists  by  themselves,  viz. :  dryness,  damp, 
heat  and  cold,  and  the  image  (ISeav)  to 
which  it  was  formed,  was  so  formed,  and 
that  the  most  holy  and  consubstantial 
Trinity  did  not  create  the  world,  but  that  it 
was  created  by  the  working  intelligence 
(NoO?  Sr)fj.iovpy6<;)  which  is  more  ancient 
than  the  world,  and  which  communicates 
to  it  its  being  :  let  him  be  anathema. 

VII. 

If  anyone  shall  say  that  Christ,  of  whom 
it  is  said  that  he  appeared  in  the  form  of 
God,  and  that  he  was  united  before  all 
time  with  God  the  Word,  and  humbled 
himself  in  these  last  days  even  to  humanity, 
had  (according  to  their  expression)  pity 
upon  the  divers  falls  which  had  appeared 
in  the  spirits  united  in  the  same  unity  (of 
which  he  himself   is  part),   and  that  to 

1  The  following  is  Hefele's  note  (Hist.  Councils,  Vol.  IV.. 
p.  226,  note  lj: 

"  napayayeiv  can  inno  way  be  translated,  as  it  has  hitherto  been, 
by  prcetergresms  or  '  passed  over ' :  '  That  Christ  has  gone  over 
to  all  corporeity  on  heaven  and  earth,'  which  gives  no  sense. 
Ilapiyeiv  means  here,  like  napayayrj  in  the  second  anathematism, 
crcare,  producere,  'create,'  'bring  into  existence.'  Snicer,  in 
his  Thesaurus,  completely  overlooked  this.  Cf.  Stephani,  s.  vv. 
napdyut  and  napayuiyri." 


II.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  553 


319 


restore  them  he  passed  through  clivers 
classes,  had  different  bodies  and  different 
names,  became  all  to  all,  an  Angel  among 
Angels,  a  Power  among  Powers,  has  clothed 
himself  in  the  different  classes  of  reason- 
able beings  with  a  form  corresponding  to 
that  class,  and  finally  has  taken  flesh  and 
blood  like  ours  and  is  become  man  for 
men ;  [if  anyone  says  all  this]  and  does 
not  profess  that  God  the  Word  humbled 
himself  and  became  man :  let  him  be 
anathema. 

VIII. 

If  anyone  shall  not  acknowledge  that 
God  the  Word,  of  the  same  substance  with 
the  Father  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  who 
was  made  flesh  and  became  man,  one  of 
the  Trinity,  is  Christ  in  every  sense  of  the 
word,  but  [shall  affirm]  that  he  is  so  only 
in  an  inaccurate  manner,  and  because  of 
the  abasement  (icevcoo-avTa),  as  they  call  it, 
of  the  intelligence  (vov?)  ;  if  anyone  shall 
affirm  that  this  intelligence  united  (o-vvtj/x- 
lievov)  to  God  the  Word,  is  the  Christ  in 
the  true  sense  of  the  word,  while  the  Logos 
.is  only  called  Christ  because  of  this  union 
with  the  intelligence,  and  e  converso  that 
the  intelligence  is  only  called  God  because 
of  the  Logos :  let  him  be  anathema. 

IX. 

If  anyone  shall  say  that  it  was  not  the 
Divine  Logos  made  man  by  taking  an  ani- 
mated body  with  a  ^v^v  Xoyixr)  and  voepa, 
that  he  descended  into  hell  and  ascended 
into  heaven,  but  shall  pretend  that  it  is  the 
Nov?  which  has  done  this,  that  Nov?  of 
which  they  say  (in  an  impious  fashion)  he 
is  Christ  properly  so  called,  and  that  he  is 
become  so  by  the  knowledge  of  the  Monad : 
let  him  be  anathema. 


If  anyone  shall  say  that  after  the  resur- 
rection the  body  of  the  Lord  was  ethereal, 
having  the  form  of  a  sphere,  and  that  such 
shall  be  the  bodies  of  all  after  the  resur- 
rection; and  that  after  the  Lord  himself 
shall  have  rejected  his  true  body  and  after 
the  others  who  rise  shall  have  rejected 
theirs,  the  nature  of  their  bodies  shall  be 
annihilated  ;  let  him  be  anathema. 


XL 

If  anyone  shall  say  that  the  future  judg- 
ment signifies  the  destruction  of  the  body 
and  that  the  end  of  the  story  will  be  an 
immaterial  'tyvais,  and  that  thereafter  there 
will  no  longer  be  any  matter,  but  only 
spirit  (vov<;) :  let  him  be  anathema. 

XII. 

If  anyone  shall  say  that  the  heavenly 
Powers  and  all  men  and  the  Devil  and  evil 
spirits  are  united  with  the  Word  of  God  in 
all  respects,  as  the  Nods  which  is  by  them 
called  Christ  and  which  is  in  the  form  of 
God,  and  which  humbled  itself  as  they  say ; 
and  [if  anyone  shall  say]  that  the  Kingdom 
of  Christ  shall  have  an  end :  let  him  be 
anathema. 

XIII. 

If  anyone  shall  say  that  Christ  [i.e.,  the 
Novs]  is  in  no  wise  different  from  other 
reasonable  beings,  neither  substantially  nor 
by  wisdom  nor  by  his  power  and  might 
over  all  things  but  that  all  will  be  placed  at 
the  right  hand  of  God,  as  well  as  he  that  is 
called  by  them  Christ  [the  Novf\,  as  also 
they  were  in  the  feigned  pre-existence  of 
all  things :  let  him  be  anathema. 

XIV. 

If  anyone  shall  say  that  all  reasonable 
beings  will  one  day  be  united  in  one,  when 
the  hypostases  as  well  as  the  numbers  and 
the  bodies  shall  have  disappeared,  and  that 
the  knowledge  of  the  world  to  come  will 
carry  with  it  the  ruin  of  the  worlds,  and  the 
rejection  of  bodies  as  also  the  abolition  of 
[all]  names,  and  that  there  shall  be  finally 
an  identity  of  the  yvwat?  and  of  the  hypos- 
tasis; moreover,  that  in  this  pretended 
apocatastasis,  spirits  only  will  continue  to 
exist,  as  it  was  in  the  feigned  pre-exist- 
ence :  let  him  be  anathema. 

XV. 

If  anyone  shall  say  that  the  life  of  the 
spirits  (vowv)  shall  be  like  to  the  life  which 
was  in  the  beginning  while  as  yet  the 
spirits  had  not  come  down  or  fallen,  so  that 
the  end  and  the  beginning  shall  be  alike, 
and  that  the  end  shall  be  the  true  measure 
of  the  beginning  :  let  him  be  anathema, 


THE    ANATHEMATISMS  OF  THE  EMPEROR  JUSTINIAN  AGAINST  ORIGEN. 


(Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  v.,  col.  G77.) 


I. 

Whoever  says  or  thinks  that  human  souls 
pre-existed,  i.e.,  that  they  had  ju'eviously  been 
spirits  and  holy  powers,  but  that,  satiated 
with  the  vision  of  God,  they  had  turned  to 
evil,  and  in  this  way  the  divine  love  in  them 
had  died  out  (dTri/zuyeto-as)  and  they  had  there- 
fore become  souls  (^x*s)  an&  nad  been  con- 
demned to  punishment  in  bodies,  shall  be  an- 
athema. 

II. 

If  anyone  says  or  thinks  that  the  soul  of 
the  Lord  pre-existed  and  was  united  with  God 
the  Word  before  the  Incarnation  and  Concep- 
tion of  the  Virgin,  let  him  be  anathema. 

III. 

If  anyone  says  or  thinks  that  the  body  of 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  was  first  formed  in  the 
womb  of  the  holy  Virgin  and  that  afterwards 
there  was  united  with  it  God  the  Word  and 
the  pre-existing  soul,  let  him  be  anathema. 

IV. 

If  anyone  says  or  thinks  that  the  Word  of 
God  has  become  like  to  all  heavenly  orders, 
so  that  for  the  cherubim  he  was  a  cherub,  for 
the  seraphim  a  seraph :  in  short,  like  all  the 
superior  powers,  let  him  be  anathema. 


If  anyone  says  or  thinks  that,  at  the  resur- 
rection, human  bodies  will  rise  spherical  in 


form  and  unlike  our  present  form,  let  him  be 
anathema. 

VI. 

If  anyone  says  that  the  heaven,  the  sun,  the 
moon,  the  stars,  and  the  waters  that  are  above 
heavens,  have  souls,  and  are  reasonable  be- 
ings, let  him  be  anathema. 

VII. 

If  anyone  says  or  thinks  that  Christ  the 
Lord  in  a  future  time  will  be  crucified  for  de- 
mons as  he  was  for  men,  let  him  be  anathema. 

VIII. 

If  anyone  says  or  thinks  that  the  power  of 
God  is  limited,  and  that  he  created  as  much 
as  he  was  able  to  compass,  let  him  be  anath- 
ema. 

IX. 

If  anyone  says  or  thinks  that  the  punish- 
ment of  demons  and  of  impious  men  is  only 
temporary,  and  will  one  day  have  an  end,  and 
that  a  restoration  (d7ro/<aTdoTao-i<;)  will  take 
place  of  demons  and  of  impious  men,  let  him 
be  anathema. 

Anathema  to  Origen  and  to  that  Adaman- 
tius,  who  set  forth  these  opinions  together 
with  his  nefarious  and  execrable  and  wicked 
doctrine,2  and  to  whomsoever  there  is  who 
thinks  thus,  or  defends  these  opinions,  or  in 
any  way  hereafter  at  any  time  shall  presume 
to  protect  them. 


1  The  reader  should  carefully  study  the  entire  tractate  of  the 
Emperor  against  Origen  of  which  these  anathernatisins  are  the 
conclusion.  It  is  found  in  Labbe  and  Cossart,  and  in  many  other 
collections. 


2  The  text  is,  I  think  corrupt,  at  all  events  the  Latin  and  Greek 
do  not  agree. 


THE  DECKETAL  EPISTLE   OF  POPE  VIGILIUS  IN  CONFIR* 
MATION  OF  THE   FIFTH  ECUMENICAL  SYNOD. 

HISTORICAL  NOTE. 

(Flemy.    Hist.  Eccl,  Liv.  xxxiii.  52.) 

At  last  the  Pope  Vigilius  resigned  himself  to  the  advice  of  the  Council,  and  six  months 
afterwards  wrote  a  letter  to  the  Patriarch  Eutychius,  wherein  he  confesses  that  he  has  been 
wanting  in  charity  in  dividing  from  his  brethren.  lie  adds,  that  one  ought  not  to  be 
ashamed  to  retract,  when  one  recognises  the  truth,  and  brings  forward  the  example  of  St, 
Augustine.  He  says,  that,  after  having  better  examined  the  matter  of  the  Three  Chapters, 
he  finds  them  worthy  of  condemnation.  "  We  recognize  for  our  brethren  and  colleagues  all 
those  who  have  condemned  them,  and  annul  by  this  writing  all  that  has  been  done  by  us  or 
by  others  for  the  defence  of  the  three  chapters," 


THE  DECKETAL  LETTER  OF  POPE 
VIGILIUS. 

(The  manuscript  from  which  this  letter  was 
printed  was  found  in  the  Royal  Library  of 
Paris  by  Peter  de  Marca  and  by  him  first 
published,  with  a  Latin  translation  and  with 
a  dissertation.  Both  of  these  with  the  Greek 
text  are  found  in  Labbe  and  Cossart's  Con- 
cilia, Tom.  V.,  col.  596  et  seqq.;  also  in  Migne's 
fair.  Lat.,  Tom.  LXIX.,  col.  121  et  seqq. 
Some  doubts  have  been  expressed  about  its 
genuineness  and  Harduin  is  of  opinion  that 
the  learned  Jesuit,  Garnerius,  in  his  notes  on 
the  Deacon  Leberatus's  Breviary,  has  proved 
its  supposititious  character.  But  the  learned 
have  not  generally  been  of  this  mind  but  have 
accepted  the  letter  as  genuine.) 

Vigilius  to  his  beloved  brother  Eutychius. 

No  one  is  ignorant  of  the  scandals  which 
the  enemy  of  the  human  race  has  stirred  up 
in  all  the  world :  so  that  he  made  each  one 
with  a  wicked  object  in  view,  striving  in  some 
way  to  fulfil  his  wish  to  destroy  the  Church 
of  God  spread  over  the  whole  world,  not  only 
in  his  own  name  but  even  in  ours  and  in 
those  of  others  to  compose  diverse  things  as 
well  in  words  as  in  writing  ;  in  so  much  that 
he  attempted  to  divide  us  who,  together  with 
our  brethren  and  fellow  bishops,  are  stopping 
in  this  royal  city,  and  who  defend  with 
equal  reverence  the  four  synods,  and  sincere- 
ly persist  in  the  one  and  the  same  faith  of 
those  four  synods,  by  his  sophistries  and  ma- 
chinations he  tried  to  part  from  them  ;  so 
that  we  ourselves  who  were  and  are  of  the 
same  opinion  as  they  touching  the  faith,  went 

VOL,    XIV. 


apart  into  discord,  brotherly  love  being  de- 
spised.1 

But  since  Christ  our  God,  who  is  the  true 
light,  whom  the  darkness  comprehendeth  not, 
hath  removed  all  confusion  from  our  minds, 
!  and  hath  so  recalled  peace  to  the  whole  world 
J  and  to  the  Church,  so  that  what  things  should 
!  be  defined  by  us  have  been  healthfully  ful- 
!  filled  through  the  revelation  of  the  Lord  and 
!  through  the  investigation  of  the  truth. 

Therefore,  my  dear  brothers,  I  do  you  to 

!  wit,  that  in  common  with  all  of  you,  our  breth- 

!  ren,  we  receive  in  all  respects  the  four  synods, 

that  is  to  say  the  Nicene,  the  Constantino- 

politan,  the  first  Ephesian,  and  the   Chalce- 

!  donian  ;  and  we  venerate  them  with  devout 

1  mind,  and  watch  over  them  with  all  our  mind. 

And  should  there  be  any  who  do  not  follow 

these  holy  synods  in   all  things   which  they 

have  defined  concerning  the  faith,  we  judge 

them  to  be  aliens  to  the  communion  of  the 

holy  and  Catholic  Church. 

Wherefore  on  account  of  our  desire  that 
you,  my  brothers,  should  know  what  we  have 
done  in  this  matter,  we  make  it  known  to  you 
by  this  letter.  For  no  one  can  doubt  how 
many  were  the  discussions  raised  on  account 
of  the  Three  Chapters,  that  is,  concerning 
Theodore,  sometime  bishop  of  Mopsuestia, 
and  his  writings,  as  well  as  concerning  the 
writings  of  Theodoret,  and  concerning  that 
letter  which  is  said  to  have  been  written  by 
Ibas  to  Maris  the  Persian  :  and  how  diverse 
were  the  things  spoken  and  written  concerning 
these  Three  Chapters.     Now  if  in  every  busi- 


1  In  this  sentence  I  have  followed  De  Marca's  Latin  version,  but 
I  must  confess  that  I  am  not  at  all  satisfied  with  the  construing 
of  the  long  phrase  beginning  Outws  ws. 


322 


II.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  553 


ness  sound  wisdom  demands  that  there  should 
be  a  retractation  of  what  was  propounded  after 
examination,  there  ought  to  be  no  shame  when 
what  was  at  first  omitted  is  made  public  after 
it  is  discovered  by  a  further  study  of  the  truth. 
[And  if  this  is  the  case  in  ordinary  affairs] 
how  much  more  in  ecclesiastical  strifes  should 
the  same  dictate  of  sound  reason  be  observed  ? 
Especially  since  it  is  manifest  that  our  Fath- 
ers, and  especially  the  blessed  Augustine, 
who  was  in  very  sooth  illustrious  in  the  Di- 
vine Scriptures,  and  a  master  in  Roman  elo- 
quence, retracted  some  of  his  own  writings, 
and  corrected  some  of  his  own  sayings,  and 
added  what  he  had  omitted  and  afterward 
found  out.  We,  led  by  their  example  never 
gave  over  the  study  of  the  questions  raised 
by  the  controversy  with  regard  to  the  before- 
mentioned  Three  Chapters,  nor  our  search  for 
passages  in  the  writings  of  our  Fathers  which 
were  applicable  to  the  matter. 

As  a  result  of  this  investigation  it  became 
evident  that  in  the  sayings  of  Theodore  of 
Mopsuestia  (which  are  spoken  against  on  all 
hands)  there  are  contained  very  many  things 
contrary  to  the  right  faith  and  to  the  teach- 
ings of  the  holy  Fathers  ;  and  for  this  very 
reason  these  same  holy  Fathers  have  left  for 
the  instruction  of  the  Church  treatises  which 
they  had  written  against  him. 

For  among  other  blasphemies  of  his  we 
find  that  he  openly  said  that  God  the  "Word 
was  one  [Person]  and  Christ  another  [Per- 
son], vexed  with  the  passions  of  the  soul 
and  with  the  desires  of  the  flesh,  and  that  he 
little  by  little  advanced  from  a  lower  to  a 
higher  stage  of  excellence  by  the  improve- 
ment (TrpoKoirrj,  per  profectum  op>erum)  of  his 
works,  and  became  irreprehensible  in  his 
manner  of  life.1  And  further  he  taught  that 
it  was  a  mere  man  who  was  baptized  in  the 
Name  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son  and  of  the  i 
Holy  Ghost,  and  that  he  received  through  j 
his  baptism  the  grace  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and 
merited  his  adoption  ;  and  therefore  that ! 
Christ  could  be  venerated  in  the  same  way  ■ 
that  the  image  of  the  Emperor  is  venerated 
as  being  the  persona  (a's  irpoa-m-ov)  of  God  the 
Word.  And  he  also  taught  that  [only]  after 
his  resurrection  he  became  immutable  in  his 
thoughts  and  altogether  impeccable. 

Moreover  he  said  that  the  union  of  the 
Word  of  God  was  made  with  Christ  as  the 
Apostle  says  the  union  is  made  between  a 
man  and  his  wife  :  They  twain  shall  be  one 
flesh  ;  and  that  after  his  resurrection,  when 

1  The  reader  will  notice  that  this  is  hardly  distinguishable 
from  the  "  moral  growth  "  and  "ethical  development"  which  the 
modern  "  kenotists  "  attribute  to  the  Incarnate  Son  of  God. 


the  Lord  breathed  upon  his  disciples  and  said, 
Receive  the  Holy  Ghost,  he  did  not  give  to 
them  the  Holy  Spirit.  In  like  strain  of  pro- 
fanity he  dared  to  say  that  the  confession 
which  Thomas  made,  when  he  touched  the 
hands  and  side  of  the  Lord  after  his  resur- 
rection, saying,  My  Lord  and  my  God,  did 
not  apply  to  Christ  (for  Theodore  did  not 
acknowledge  Christ  to  be  God)  ;  but  that 
Thomas  gave  glory  to  God  being  filled  with 
wonder  at  the  miracle  of  the  resurrection, 
and  so  said  these  words. 

But  what  is  still  worse  is  this,  that  in  inter- 
preting the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  Theodore 
makes  Christ  like  to  Plato,  and  Manichseus,  and 
Epicurus,  and  Marcian,  saying  :  Just  as  each 
i  of  these  were  the  authors  of  their  own  peculiar 
|  teachings,  and  called  their  disciples  after  their 
j  own  names,  Platonists,  and  Manichseans,  and 
!  Epicureans,   and  Marcionites,  just  so  Christ 
I  invented   dogmas   and    called   his  followers 
!  Christians  after  himself. 

j  Let  therefore  the  whole  Catholic  Church 
;  know  that  justly  and  irreproachably  we  have 
arrived  at  the  conclusions  contained  in  this 
our  constitution.  Wherefore  we  condemn 
and  anathematize  Theodore,  formerly  bishop 
of  Mopsuestia,  and  his  impious  writings,  to- 
gether with  all  other  heretics,  who  (as  is  mani- 
fest) have  been  condemned  and  anathematized  , 
by  the  four  holy  Synods  aforesaid,  and  by  the 
Catholic  Church :  also  the  writings  of  Theo- 
doret  which  are  opposed  to  the  right  faith, 
and  are  against  the  Twelve  Chapters  of  St. 
Cyril,  and  against  the  first  Council  of  Ephe- 
sus,  which  were  written  by  him  in  defence  of 
Theodore  and  Nestorius. 

Moreover  we  anathematize  and  condemn 
the  letter  to  the  Persian  heretic  Maris,  which 
is  said  to  have  been  written  by  Ibas,  which 
denies  that  Christ  the  Word  was  incarnate  of 
the  holy  Mother  of  God  and  ever  -  virgin 
Mary,  and  was  made  man,  but  declares  that  a 
mere  man  was  born  of  her,  and  this  man  it 
styles  a  temple,  so  from  this  we  are  given  to 
understand  that  God  the  Word  is  one  [Per- 
son] and  Christ  another  [Person].  Moreover 
it  calumniates  Saint  Cyril,  the  master  and  her- 
ald of  the  orthodox  faith,  calling  him  a  here- 
tic, and  charging  him  with  writing  things 
similar  to  Apollinaris  ;  and  it  reviles  the  first 
Synod  of  Ephesus,  as  having  condemned 
Nestorius  without  deliberation  or  investiga- 
tion ;  it  likewise  declares  the  twelve  chapters 
of  St.  Cyril  to  be  impious  and  contrary  to  the 
right  faith  ;  and  further  still  it  defends  Theo- 
dore and  Nestorius,  and  their  impious  teach- 
ings and  writings. 

Therefore  we  anathematize  and  condemn 


II.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  553 


323 


the  aforesaid  impious  Three  Chapters,  to-wit, 
the  impious  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  and  his 
impious  writings  ;  And  all  that  Theodoret 
impiously  wrote,  as  well  as  the  letter  said  to 
have  been  written  by  Ibas,  in  which  are  con- 
tained the  above  mentioned  profane  blasphe- 
mies. We  likewise  subject  to  anathema  who- 
ever shall  at  any  time  believe  that  these  chap- 
ters should  be  received  or  defended  ;  or  shall 
attempt  to  subvert  this  present  condemna- 
tion. 

And  further  we  define  that  they  are  our 
brethren  and  fellow-priests  who  ever  keep  the 
right  faith  set  forth  by  those  afore-mentioned 
synods,  and  shall  have  condemned  the  above- 
named  Three  Chapters,  or  even  do  now  con- 
demn them. 

And  further  we  annul  and  evacuate  by  this 
present  written  definition  of  ours  whatever 
has  been  said  by  me  (a  me)  or  by  others  in 
defence  of  the  aforesaid  Three  Chapters. 


Far  be  it  from  the  Catholic  Church  that 
anyone  should  say  that  all  the  blasphemies 
above  related  or  they  who  held  and  followed 
such  things,  were  received  by  the  before-men- 
tioned four  synods  or  by  any  one  of  them. 
For  it  is  most  clear,  that  no  one  was  admitted 
by  the  before-mentioned  holy  Fathers  and 
especially  by  the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  about 
whom  there  was  any  suspicion,  unless  he  had 
first  repelled  the  above-named  blasphemies 
and  all  like  to  them,  or  else  had  denied  and 
condemned  the  heresy  or  blasphemies  of 
which  he  was  suspected. 

Subscription. 

May  God  preserve  thee  in  health,  most 
honourable  brother.  Dated  VI.  Id.  Dec.  in 
the  xxijd  year  of  our  lord  the  Emperor  Jus- 
tinian, eternal  Augustus,  the  xijth  year  after 
the  consulate  of  the  illustrious  Basil,1 


HISTORICAL  EXCURSUS  ON  THE  AFTER  HISTORY  OF  THE  COUNCIL. 


Pope  Vigilius  died  on  his  way  home,  but  not  until,  as  we  have  seen,  he  had  accepted  and 
approved  the  action  of  the  council  in  doing  exactly  that  which  he  "  by  the  authority  of  the 
Apostolic  See  "  in  his  Constitution  had  forbidden  it  to  do.2  He  died  at  the  end  of  554  or  the 
beginning  of  555. 

Pelagius  I.,  who  succeeded  him  in  the  See  of  Rome,  likewise  confirmed  the  Acts  of  the  Fifth 
Synod.  The  council  however  was  not  received  in  all  parts  of  the  West,  although  it  had  ob- 
tained the  approval  of  the  Pope.  It  was  bitterly  opposed  in  the  whole  of  the  north  of  Italy, 
in  England,  France,  and  Spain,  and  also  in  Africa  and  Asia.  The  African  opposition  died  out 
by  559,  but  Milan  was  in  schism  until  571,  when  Pope  Justin  II.  published  his  "  Henoticon." 
In  Istria  the  matter  was  still  more  serious,  and  when  in  G07  the  bishop  of  Aquileia-Grado 
with  those  of  his  suffragans  who  were  subject  to  the  Empire  made  their  submission  and  were 
reconciled  to  the  Church,  the  other  bishops  of  his  jurisdiction  set  up  a  schismatical  Patri- 
archate at  old  Aquileia,  and  this  schism  continued  till  the  Council  of  Aquileia  in  700.  But 
before  this  the  II.  Council  of  Constantinople  was  received  all  the  world  over  as  the  Fifth 
Ecumenical  Council,  and  was  fully  recognized  as  such  by  the  Sixth  Council  in  680. 


i  i.e.  A.D.  553. 

2  The  last  sentence  of  the  Constitutum,  the  sentence  which  the 
Pope  gave  and  which  the  council  rejected,  is  as  follows  :  "  We  or- 
dain and  decree  that  it  be  permitted  to  no  one  who  stands  in  eccle- 
siastical order  of  office,  to  write  or  bring  forward,  or  undertake, 
or  teach  anything  contrary  to  the  contents  of  this  Constitutum  in 


regard  to  the  Three  Chapters,  or,  after  this  declaration  begin  anew 
controversy  about  them.  And  if  anything  has  already  been  done 
or  spoken  in  regard  of  the  Three  Chapters  in  contradiction  of  this 
our  ordinance  by  anyone  whomsoever,  this  we  declare  void  by  the 
authority  of  the  Apostolic  See."  It  is  perfectly  clear  that  the  Em- 
peror is  the  "  anyone"  referred  to. 


Y  3 


THE  SIXTH  ECUMENICAL  COUNCIL. 
THE  THIRD  COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANTINOPLE. 

A.D.  680-681. 

Emperor. — Constantine  Pogonatus. 
Pope. — Agatho  I. 


Historical  Introduction. 

Extracts  from  the  Acts,  Session  I. 

The  Letter  of  Pope  Agatho  to  the  Em- 
peror. 

The  Letter  of  the  Roman  Synod  to  the 
Council. 

Introductory  Note. 

Extracts  from  the  Acts,  Session  VIII. 

The  Sentence  against  the  Monothelites, 
Session  XIII. 


Elenclms. 

The  Acclamations,  Session  XVI. 
The  Definition  of  Faith. 
Abstract  of  the  Prosphoueticus  to  the 
Emperor. 

The  Synodal  Letter  to  Pope  Agatho, 
Excursus  on  the  Condemnation  of  Pope 
Ilonorius. 

The  Imperial  Edict  in  abstract* 


HISTORICAL    INTRODUCTION. 

The  Sixth  Ecumenical  Council  met  on  November  7,  680,  for  its  first  session,  and  ended 
its  meetings,  which  are  said  to  have  been  eighteen  in  number,  on  September  16th  of  the 
next  year.  The  number  of  bishops  present  was  under  three  hundred  and  the  minutes  of  the 
last  session  have  only  174  signatures  attached  to  them. 

"When  the  Emperor  first  summoned  the  council  he  had  no  intention  that  it  should  be 
ecumenical.  From  the  Sacras  it  appears  that  he  had  summoned  all  the  Metropolitans  and 
bishops  of  the  jurisdiction  of  Constantinople,  and  had  also  informed  the  Archbishop  of 
Antioch  that  he  might  send  Metropolitans  and  bishops.  A  long  time  before  he  had  written 
to  Pope  Agatho  on  the  subject. 

When  the  synod  assembled  however,  it  assumed  at  its  first  session  the  title  "  Ecumeni- 
cal," and  all  the  five  patriarchs  were  represented,  Alexandria  and  Jerusalem  having  sent 
deputies  although  they  were  at  the  time  in  the  hands  of  the  infidel. 

In  this  Council  the  Emperor  presided  in  person  surrounded  by  high  court  officials.  On 
his  right  sat  the  Patriarchs  of  Constantinople  and  Antioch  and  next  to  them  the  representa- 
tive of  the  Patriarch  of  Alexandria.  On  the  Emperor's  left  were  seated  the  representatives 
of  the  Pope.  In  the  midst  were  placed,  as  usual,  the  Holy  Gospels.  After  the  eleventh 
session  however  the  Emperor  was  no  longer  able  to  be  present,  but  returned  and  presided 
at  the  closing  meeting. 

The  sessions  of  the  council  were  held  in  the  domed  hall  (or  possibly  chapel)  in  the 
imperial  palace  ;  which,  the  Acts  tell  us,  was  called  Trullo  (Zv  ™  creKperw  tov  Seiov  irakanov, 
to)  ovtu)  Xeyojiwo)  TpdvAAu)). 

It  may  be  interesting  to  remark  that  the  Sacms  sent  to  the  bishops  of  Rome  and  Con- 
stantinople are  addressed,  the  one  to  "The  Most  holy  and  Blessed  Archbishop  of  Old 
Rome  and  Ecumenical  Pope,"  and  the  other  to  "The  Most  holy  and  Blessed  Archbishop  of 
Constantinople  and  Ecumenical  Patriarch."  Some  of  the  titles  given  themselves  by  the 
signers  of  the  " Prosphoneticus  "  are  interesting — "George,  an  humble  presbyter  of  the 
holy  Roman  Church,  and  holding  the  place  of  the  most  blessed  Agatho,  ecumenical  Pope  of 
the  City  of  Rome  .  .  .,"  "John,  an  humble  deacon  of  the  holy  Roman  Church  and 
holding  the  place  of  the  most  blessed  Agatho,  and  ecumenical  Pope  of  the  City  of  Rome 
.  .  .  ,"  "  George,  by  the  mercy  of  God  bishop  of  Constantinople  which  is  New  Rome," 
"  Peter  a  presbyter  and  holding  the  place  of  the  Apostolic  See  of  the  great  city  Alexandria 
.  .  .  ,"  "George,  an  humble  presbyter  of  the  Holy  Resurrection  of  Christ  our  God,  and 
holding  the  place  of  Theodore  the  presbyter,  beloved  of  God,  who  holds  the  place  of  the 
Apostolic  See  of  Jerusalem  .  .  .  ,"  "John,  by  the  mercy  of  God  bishop  of  the  City  of 
Thessalonica,  and  legate  of  the  Apostolic  See  of  Rome,"  "John,  the  unworthy  bishop  of 
Portus,  legate  of  the  whole  Council  of  the  holy  Apostolic  See  of  Rome,"  "  Stephen,  by  the 
mercy  of  God,  bishop  of  Corinth,  and  legate  of  the  Apostolic  See  of  Old  Rome." 


EXTRACTS   FROM  THE  ACTS. 


SESSION  I. 


(Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  VI.,  col.  609  et  seqq.) 


[After  a  history  of  the  assembly  of  the 
Council,  the  Acts  begin  with  the  Speech  of 
the  Papal  Legates,  as  follows  :] 

Most  benign  lord,  in  accordance  with  the 
Sacra  to  our  most  holy  Pope l  from  your 
God-instructed  majesty,  we  have  been  sent 
by  him  to  the  most  holy  footsteps  of  your 
God-confirmed  serenity,  bearing  with  us  his 
suggestion  (ava<f>op&s,  suggestione)  as  well  as 
the  other  suggestion  of  his  Synod  equally 
addressed  to  your  divinely  preserved  Piety 
by  the  venerable  bishops  subject  to  it,  which 
also  we  offered  to  your  God-crowned  Forti- 
tude. Since,  then,  during  the  past  forty- 
six  years,  more  or  less,  certain  novelties  in 
expression,  contrary  to  the  Orthodox  faith, 
have  been  introduced  by  those  who  were  at 
several  times  bishops  of  this,  your  royal 
and  God-preserved  city,  to  wit:  Sergius, 
Paul,  Pyrrhus,  and  Peter,  as  also  by  Cyrus, 
at  one  time  archbishop  of  the  city  of  Alex- 
andria, as  well  also  as  by  Theodore,  who  was 
bishop  of  a  city  called  Pharan,  and  by  cer- 
tain others  their  followers,  and  since  these 
things  have  in  no  small  degree  brought  con- 
fusion into  the  Church  throughout  the  whole 
world,  for  they  taught  dogmatically   that 

1  The  word  "  our  "  omitted  in  the  Latin. 


there  was  but  one  will  in  the  dispensation 
of  the  Incarnation  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
one  of  the  Holy  Trinity,  and  one  operation ; 
and  since  many  times  your  servant,  our 
apostolic  see,  has  fought  against  this,  and 
then  prayed  against  it,  and  by  no  means 
been  able,  even  up  to  now,  to  draw  away 
from  such  a  depraved  opinion  its  advo- 
cates, we  beseech  your  God-crowned  for- 
titude, that  such  as  share  these  views  of  the 
most  holy  church  of  Constantinople  may 
tell  us,  what  is  the  source  of  this  new-fangled 
language. 

[Answer  of  the  Monothelites  made  at  the 
Emperor's  bidding  .•] 

We  have  brought  out  no  new  method  of 
speech,  but  have  taught  whatever  we  have 
received  from  the  holy  Ecumenical  Synods 
and  from  the  holy  approved  Fathers,  as 
well  as  from  the  archbishops  of  this  impe- 
rial city,  to  wit :  Sergius,  Paul,  Pyrrhus, 
and  Peter,  as  also  from  Honorius  who  was 
Pope  of  Old  Borne,  and  from  Cyrus  who  was 
Pope  of  Alexandria,  that  is  to  say  with  ref- 
erence to  will  and  operation,  and  so  we  have 
believed,  and  so  we  believe,  so  we  preach ; 
and  further  we  are  ready  to  stand  by,  and 
defend  this  faith. 


THE  LETTER  OF  AGATHO,  POPE  OF  OLD  ROME,  TO  THE 
EMPEROR,  AND  THE  LETTER  OF  AGATHO  AND  OF  125 
BISHOPS  OF  THE  ROMAN  SYNOD,  ADDRESSED  TO  THE 
SIXTH   COUNCIL. 

{Read  at  the  Fourth  Session,  November  15,  at  the  request  of  George,  Patriarch  of 
Constantinople  and  his  Suffragans?) 

INTRODUCTORY  NOTE. 

(Bossuet,  Dcfcnsio  Cler.  Gal.  Lib.  VII.,  cap.  xxiv.) 
All  the  fathers  spoke  one  by  one,  and  only  after  examination  were  the  letters  of  St. 
Agatho  and  the  whole  Western  Council  approved.  Agatho,  indeed,  and  the  Western  Bish- 
ops put  forth  their  decrees  thus  ['We  have  directed  persons  from  our  humility  to  your 
valour  protected  of  God,  which  shall  offer  to  you  the  report  of  us  all,  that  is,  of  all  the  Bishops 
in  the  Northern  or  Western  Regions,  in  which  too  we  have  summed  up  the  confession  of  our 
Apostolic  Faith,  yet ']  not  as  those  who  wished  to  contend  about  these  things  as  being  uncer- 
tain, but,  being  certain  and  unchangeable  to  set  them  forth  in  a  brief  definition,  [suppliantly 
beseeching  you  that,  by  the  favour  of  your  sacred  majesty,  you  would  command  these  same 
thing's  to  be  preached  to  all,  and  to  have  force  with  all. ']  Undoubtedly,  therefore,  so  far  as 
in  them  lay,  they  defined  the  matter.  The  question  was,  whether  the  other  Churches  through- 
out the  world  Avould  agree,  and  a  matter  so  great  was  only  made  clear  after  Episcopal  exam- 
ination. But  the  high,  magnificent,  yet  true  expressions,  which  St.  Agatho  had  used  of  his 
See,  namely,  that  resting  on  the  promise  of  the  Lord  it  had  never  turned  aside  from  the  path 
of  truth,  and  that  its  Pontiffs,  the  predecessors  of  Agatho,  who  were  charged  in  the  person 
of  Peter  to  strengthen  their  brethren,  had  ever  discharged  that  office,  this  the  Fathers  of  the 
Council  hear  and  receive.  But  not  the  less  they  examine  the  matter,  they  inquire  into  the 
decrees  of  Roman  Pontiffs,  and,  after  inquiry  held,  approve  Agatho's  decrees,  condemn  those 
of  Honorius :  a  certain  proof  that  they  did  not  understand  Agatho's  expressions  as  if  it  were 
necessary  to  receive  without  discussion  every  decree  of  Roman  Pontiffs  even  de  fide,  inasmuch 
as  they  are  subjected  to  the  supreme  and  final  examination  of  a  General  Council :  but  as  if 
these  expressions  taken  as  a  whole,  in  their  total,  hold  good  in  the  full  and  complete  succes- 
sion of  Peter,  as  we  have  often  said,  and  in  its  proper  place  shall  say  at  greater  length. 


THE  LETTER  OF  POPE  AGATHO. 

{Found  in  Migne,  Pat.  Lat.,  Tom.  LXXXVIL,  col  1161 ;  L.  and  C,  Tom.  VI.,  col  630.) 

Agatho  a  bishop  and  servant  of  the  ser- 
vants of  God  to  the  most  devout  and  serene 
victors  and  conquerors,  our  most  beloved 
sons  and  lovers  of  God  and  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  the  Emperor  Constantine  the 
Great,   and    to    Heraclius    and    Tiberius, 


Augustuses. 

While  contemplating  the  various  anxie- 
ties of  human  life,  and  while  groaning  with 
vehement   weeping    before     the   one   true 


God,  in  prayer  that  he  might  impart  to  my 
wavering  soul  the  comfort  of  his  divine 
mercy,  and  might  lift  me  by  his  right  hand 
out  of  the  depths  of  grief  and  anxiety,  I 
most  gratefully  recognize,  my  most  illus- 
trious lords  and  sons,  that  j7our  purpose 
[i.e.  of  holding  a  Council]  afforded  me  deep 
and  wonderful  consolation.  For  it  was 
most  pious  and  emanated  from  your  most 
meek  tranquillity,  taught  by  the  divine 
benignity  for  the  benefit  of  the  Christian 


1  The  words  in  brackets  are  not  quoted  by  Bossuet. 


III.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.   680-681 


329 


commonwealth  divinely  entrusted  to  your 
keeping,   that  your    imperial    power   and 
clemency  might  have  a    care    to    enquire 
diligently  concerning  'the    things   of   God 
(through  whom  Kings   do   reign,   who   is 
himself  King  of  Kings  and  Lord  of  Lords) 
and  might    seek    after    the   truth   of  his 
spotless  faith  as  it  has  been  handed  down 
by  the  Apostles    and    by  the    Apostolic 
fathers,  and  be  zealously  affected  to  com- 
mand that  in  all  the  churches  the  pure  tra- 
dition be  held.     And  that  no  one  may  be 
ignorant  of  this  pious  intention  of  yours, 
or  suspect  that  we  have  been  compelled  by 
force^  and  have  not  freely  consented  to  the 
carrying  into  effect  of  the  imperial  decrees 
touching  the  preaching  of  our  evangelical 
faith  which   was  addressed  to  our   pred- 
ecessor    Donus,    a    pontiff   of    Apostolic 
memory,  they  have  through  our   ministry 
been  sent  to  and  entirely  approved  by  all 
nations  and  peoples;  for  these  decrees  the 
Holy  fepint  by  his  grace  dictated  to  the 
tongue  of  the  imperial  pen,   out   of  the 
treasure  of  a  pure  heart,  as  the  words  of  an 
adviser  not  of  an  oppressor,  defending  him- 
self, not  looking  with  contempt  upon  others  ■ 
not  afflicting,  but  exhorting;  and  inviting 
to  those  things  which  are  of  God  in  godly 
wise  because  he,  the  Maker  and  Redeemer 
of  all  men,  who  had  he  come  in  the  majesty 
of    his    Godhead   into   the   world,   might 
have  terrified  mortals,  preferred  to  descend 
through  his  inestimable  clemency  and  hu- 
mility to  the  estate  of  us   whom  he   had 
created  and  thus  to  redeem  us,  who  also 
expects  from  us  a  willing  confession  of  the 
true  faith. 

And  this  it  is  that  the  blessed  Peter,  the 
prince  of  the  Apostles,   teaches:     "Feed 
the  flock  of  Christ  which  is  among  you,  not 
by  constraint,   but  willingly,  exhorting   it 
according  to  God. "     Therefore,  encouraged 
by  these  imperial  decrees,  Omost  meek  lords 
°f  ajJ.th.m§s>  and  relieved  from  the  depths 
of  affliction  and  raised  to  the  hope  of  con- 
solation, I  have  begun,  refreshed  somewhat 
by  a  better   confidence,   to  comply  with 
promptness    with   the  things  which  were 
sometime  ago  bidden  by  the  Sacra  of  your 
gentlest  fortitude,  and  am  endeavouring  in 
obedience  therewith  to  find  persons,  such 
as_  our  deficient  times  and  the  quality  of 
this  obedient  province  permit,  and  taking 
advice  with  my  fellow-servant  bishops,   as 
well  concerning  the  approaching  synod  of 


this  Apostolic  See,  as  concerning  our  own 
clergy,  the  lovers  of  the  Christian  Empire, 
and,   afterwards   concerning    the   religious 
servants  of  God,  that  I  might  exhort  them 
to   follow  in  haste   the  footsteps  of  your 
most  pious  Tranquillity.     And,  were  it  not 
that  the  great  compass  of  the  provinces,  in 
which   our  humility's  council  is  situated 
had  caused  so  great   a  loss  of   time,  our 
servitude  a  while  ago  could  have  fulfilled 
with  studious  obedience   what  even  uoav 
has  scarcely  been  done.     For  while  from 
the  various   provinces  a  council  has  been 
gathering  about  us,  and  while  we  have  been 
able  to  select  some  persons  of  those  from 
this  very  Roman  city  immediately  subject 
to  your  most  serene  power,  or  from  those 
near  by,  others  again  we  have  been  obliged 
to  wait  for  from  far  distant  provinces,  in 
which  the  word  of    Christian   faith  was 
preached  by  those  sent  by  the  predecessors 
of  my  littleness ;  and  thus  quite  a  space  of 
time  has  elapsed :  and  I  pass  over  my  bodily 
pains  in  consequence  of  which  life  to  a  per- 
petually suffering  person  is  neither  possible 
nor  pleasant.      Therefore,  most  Christian 
lords  and  sons,    in  accordance   with   the 
most  pious  jussio  of  your   God-protected 
clemency,  we  have  had  a  care  to  send,  with 
the  devotion  of  a  prayerful  heart  (from  the 
obedience  Ave  owe  you,  not  because  Ave  re- 
lied on  the  [superabundant]  knoAvledge  of 
those  whom  Ave  send  to  you),  our  felloAv- 
servants  here  present,  Abundantius,  John, 
and  John,  our  most  reverend  brother  bish- 
ops, Theodore  and  George  our  most  belov- 
ed sons  and   presbyters,   with   our  most 
beloved  son  John,  a  deacon,  and  with  Con- 
stantme,  a  subdeacon  of  this  holy  spiritual 
mother,   the    Apostolic    See,   as    Avell    as 
Theodore,  the  presbyter  legate  of  the  holy 
Church  of  Ravenna  and  the  religious  ser- 
vants of  God  the  monks.     For,  among  men 
placed  amid  the  Gentiles,  and  earning  their 
daily  bread  by  bodily  labour  with  considera- 
ble distraction,  Iioav  could  a  knowledge  of 
the  Scriptures,  in  its  fulness,  be  found  un- 
less Avhat  has  been  canonically  defined  by 
our  holy  and  apostolic  predecessors,  and  by 
the  venerable  five  councils,  Ave  preserve  in 
simplicity  of  heart,  and  without  any  dis- 
torting keep  the  faith  come  to  us  from  the 
Fathers,  always  desirous  and  endeavouring 
to  possess  that  one  and  chiefest  good,  viz  * 
that  nothing  be  diminished  from  the  things 
canonically  defined,  and  that  nothing  be 


330 


III.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  680-681 


changed  nor  fielded  thereto,  but  that  those 
same  things,  both  in  words  and  sense,  be 
guarded  untouched  ?  To  these  same  com- 
missioners we  also  have  given  the  witness 
of  some  of  the  holy  Fathers,  whom  this 
Apostolic  Church  of  Christ  receives,  to- 
gether with  their  books,  so  that,  having 
obtained  from  the  power  of  your  most 
benign  Christianity  the  privilege  of  sug- 
gesting, they  might  out  of  these  endeavour 
to  give  satisfaction,  (when  your  imperial 
Meekness  shall  have  so  commanded)  as 
to  what  this  Apostolic  Church  of  Christ, 
their  spiritual  mother  and  the  mother  of 
your  God-sprung  empire,  believes  and 
preaches,  not  in  words  of  worldly  eloquence, 
which  are  not  at  the  command  of  ordinary 
men,  but  in  the  integrity  of  the  apostolic 
faith,  in  which  having  been  taught  from 
the  cradle,  we  pray  that  we  may  serve 
and  obey  the  Lord  of  heaven,  the  Propa- 
gator of  your  Christian  empire,  even  unto 
the  end.  Consequently,  we  have  granted 
them  faculty  or  authority  with  your  most 
tranquil  mightiness,  to  afford  satisfaction 
with  simplicity  whenever  your  clemency 
shall  command,  it  being  enjoined  on  them 
as  a  limitation  that  they  presume  not  to 
add  to,  take  away,  or  to  change  anything ; 
but  that  they  set  forth  this  tradition  of  the 
Apostolic  See  in  all  sincerity  as  it  has  been 
taught  by  the  apostolic  pontiffs,  who  were 
our  predecessors.  For  these  delegates  Ave 
most  humbly  implore  with  bent  knees  of 
the  mind  your  clemency  ever  full  of  con- 
descension, that  agreeably  to  the  most  be- 
nign and  most  august  promise  of  the  impe- 
rial Sacra,  your  Christlike  Tranquillity  may 
deem  them  worthy  of  acceptance  and  may 
deign  to  give  a  favourable  hearing  to  their 
most  humble  suggestions.  Thus  may  your 
meekest  Piety  find  the  ears  of  Almighty 
God  open  to  your  prayers,  and  may  you 
order  that  they  return  to  their  own 
unharmed  in  their  rectitude  of  our  Apos- 
tolic faith,  as  well  as  in  the  integrity  of 
their  bodies.  And  thus  may  the  supernal 
Majesty  restore  to  the  benign  rule  of 
your  government  through  the  most  heroic 
and  unconquerable  labours  of  your  God- 
strengthened  clemency,  the  whole  Christian 
commonwealth,  and  may  he  subdue  hostile 
nations  to  your  mighty  sceptre,  that  there 
may  be  satisfaction  from  this  time  forth  to 
every  soul  and  to  all  nations,  because  what 
you  deigned  to  promise  solemnly  by  your 


most  august  letters  about  the  immunity 
and  safety  of  those  who  came  to  the  Coun- 
cil, you  have  fulfilled  in  all  respects.  It  is 
not  their  wisdom  that  gave  us  confidence 
to  make  bold  to  send  them  to  your  pious 
presence ;  but  our  littleness  obediently 
complied  with  what  your  imperial  benig- 
nity, with  a  gracious  order,  exhorted  to. 
And  briefly  we  shall  intimate  to  your  di- 
vinely instructed  Piety,  what  the  strength 
of  our  Apostolic  faith  contains,  which  We 
have  received  through  Apostolic  tradition 
and  through  the  tradition  of  the  Apos- 
tolical pontiffs,  and  that  of  the  five  holy 
general  synods,  through  which  the  founda- 
tions of  Christ's  Catholic  Church  have  been 
strengthened  and  established ;  this  then  is 
the  status  [and  the  regular  tradition1]  of 
our  Evangelical  and  Apostolic  faith,  to  wit, 
that  as  Ave  confess  the  holy  and  insepa- 
rable Trinity,  that  is,  the  Father,  the  Son 
and  the  Holy  Ghost,  to  be  of  one  deity,  of 
one  nature  and  substance  or  essence,  so  we 
will  profess  also  that  it  has  one  natural 
will,  power,  operation,  domination,  majesty, 
potency,  and  glory.  And  whatever  is  said 
of  the  same  Holy  Trinity  essentially  in 
singular  number  we  understand  to  refer  to 
the  one  nature  of  the  three  consubstantial 
Persons,  having  been  so  taught  by  canonical 
logic.  But  when  we  make  a  confession  con- 
cerning one  of  the  same  three  Persons  of 
that  Holy  Trinity,  of  the  Son  of  God,  or 
God  the  "Word,  and  of  the  mystery  of  his 
adorable  dispensation  according  to  the  flesh, 
Ave  assert  that  all  things  are  double  in  the  one 
and  the  same  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus 
Christ  according  to  the  Evangelical  tradi- 
tion, that  is  to  say,  yve  confess  his  tAvo 
natures,  to  wit  the  divine  and  the  human, 
of  which  and  in  which  he,  eAren  after  the 
wonderful  and  inseparable  union,  subsists. 
And  we  confess  that  each  of  his  natures 
has  its  own  natural  propriety,  and  that  the 
diArine  has  all  things  that  are  divine,  with- 
out any  sin.  And  we  recognize  that  each 
one  (of  the  two  natures)  of  the  one  and 
the  same  incarnated,  that  is,  humanated 
(humanati)  Word  of  God  is  in  him  uncon- 
fusedly,  inseparably  and  unchangeably,  in- 
telligence alone  discerning  a  unity,  to  avoid 
the  error  of  confusion.  For  we  equally  detest 
the  blasphemy  of  diATision  and  of  commixt- 
ure.   For  Avhen  we  confess  two  natures  and 

1  Only  in  the  Latin. 


III.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  680-681 


331 


two  natural  wills,  and  two  natural  operations 
in  our  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  we  do  not 
assert  that   they  are  contrary  or   opposed 
one   to  the   other  (as  those  who  err  from 
the  path  of  truth  and  accuse  the  apostolic 
tradition  of  doing.     Far  be   this   impiety 
from  the  hearts  of  the   faithful!),  nor  as 
though  separated  (per  se  separated)  in  two 
persons  or  subsistences,  but  we   say  that 
as  the  same   our  Lord  Jesus   Christ  has 
two  natures  so  also  he  has  two  natural  wills 
and  operations,  to  wit,  the  divine  and  the 
human:  the  divine  will  and  operation  he 
has  m  common  with  the  coessential  Father 
from   all    eternity:    the    human,   he    has 
received  from  us,  taken  with  our  nature  in 
time.     This  is  the  apostolic  and  evangelic 
tradition,   which  the  spiritual   mother  of 
your  most  felicitous  empire,  the  Apostolic 
Church  of  Christ,  holds.     This  is  the  pure 
expression  of  piety.     This  is  the  true  and 
immaculate    profession   of    the    Christian 
religion,  not  invented  by  human  cunning 
but  which  was  taught  by  the  Holy  Ghost 
through  the  princes  of  the  Apostles.     This 
is  the  firm  and  irreprehensible  doctrine  of 
the  holy  Apostles,  the  integrity  of  the  sin- 
cere piety  of  which,  so  long  as  it  is  preached 
freely,  defends  the   empire  of  your   Tran- 
quillity in  the   Christian    commonwealth 
an<*  exults   [will  defend  it,  will  render  it 
stable;    and  exulting],  and  (as  we  firmly 
trust)  will  demonstrate  it  full  of  happiness. 
Believe   your  most  humble    [servant],  my 
most^  Christian  lords  and  sons,  that  I  am 
pouring  forth  these  prayers  with  my  tears, 
tor  its   stability  and  exultation   [in  Greek 
exaltation].     And  these  things  I  (although 
unworthy  and    insignificant)   dare   advise 
through  my  sincere  love,  because  your  God- 
granted  victory  is  our  salvation,  the  hap- 
piness  of  your    Tranquillity   is    our   joy 
the  harmlessness  of  your  kindness  is  the 
security  of  our  littleness.     And  therefore  I 
beseech    you  with  a  contrite  heart    and 
rivers  of  tears,  with  prostrated  mind,  deign 
to  stretch  forth  your  most  clement  right 
hand  to  the  Apostolic  doctrine  which  the 
co-worker  of  your  pious  labours,  the  blessed 
apostle  Peter,  has  delivered,  that  it  be  not 
hidden  under   a  bushel,   but  that    it    be 
Preached  m  the  whole  earth  more  shrilly 
than  a  bugle:  because  the  true  confession 
thereof  for   which  Peter  was   pronounced 
blessed  by  the  Lord  of  all  things,  was  re- 
Yealed  by   the  Father  of   heaven,  for  he 


received  from  the  Eedeemer  of  all  himself 
by  three  commendations,  the  duty  of  feed- 
ing the  spiritual   sheep    of   the   Church  • 
under  whose  protecting  shield,  this  Apos- 
,  tolic  Church  of  his  has  never  turned  away 
j  from  the  path  of  truth  in  any  direction  of 
error,   whose    authority,   as    that    of    the 
Prince  of  all  the  Apostles,  the  whole  Cath- 
olic Church,  and  the  Ecumenical  Synods 
have  faithfully  embraced,  and  followed  in 
all  things;  and  all  the  venerable  Fathers 
have     embraced    its    Apostolic    doctrine 
through  which  they  as  the  most  approved 
luminaries  of  the  Church  of   Christ  have 
shone;     and    the   holy   orthodox    doctors 
have  venerated  and  followed  it,  while  the 
heretics  have  pursued  it  Avith  false  crimina- 
tions and  with  derogatory  hatred.     This  is 
the  living  tradition  of    the    Apostles  of 
Christ,    which    his   Church    holds    every- 
where, which   is   chiefly  to  be   loved   and 
fostered,  and  is  to  be  preached  with  confi- 
dence, which  conciliates  with  God  through 
its  truthful  confession,  which  also  renders 
one  commendable  to  Christ  the  Lord,  which 
keeps  the  Christian  empire  of  your  Clem- 
ency,  which    gives   far-reaching   victories 
to    your   most   pious  Fortitude  from  the 
Lord  of  heaven,  which  accompanies  you  in 
battle,  and  defeats  your  foes ;  which  pro- 
tects on  every  side  as  an  impregnable  wall 
your   God-sprung    empire,   which    throws 
terror  into  opposing  nations,  and   smites 
them  with  the  divine  wrath,  which  also  in 
wars  celestially  gives  triumphal  palms  over 
the  downfall  and  subjection  of  the  enemy 
and  ever  guards  your  most  faithful   sov- 
ereignty secure  and  joyful  in  peace.     For 
this  is  the  rule  of  the  true  faith,  which  this 
spiritual   mother   of    your    most    tranquil 
empire,  the  Apostolic  Church  of  Christ,  has 
both  m  prosperity  and  in  adversity  always 
held  and  defended  with  energy ;  which   it 
will  be  proved,  by  the  grace  of  Almighty 
God,  has  never  erred  from  the  path  of  the 
apostolic   tradition,  nor  has   she  been  de- 
praved by  yielding  to  heretical  innovations, 
but   from  the  beginning  she  has  received 
the  Christian  faith  from  her  founders,  the 
princes  of  the  Apostles  of  Christ,  and  re- 
mains undefiled  unto  the  end,  according  to 
the  divine  promise  of  the  Lord  and  Saviour 
himself,   which    he    uttered    in   the  holy 
Gospels  to   the  prince   of  his  disciples: 
saying    "Peter,  Peter,  behold,  Satan  hath 
desired  to  have  you,   that  he  might  sift 


332 


ill.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  680-681 


you  as  wheat ;  but  I  have  prayed,  for  thee, 
that  (thy)  faith  fail  not.  And  when  thou 
art  converted,  strengthen  thy  brethren."  Let 
your  tranquil  Clemency  therefore  consider, 
since  it  is  the  Lord  and  Saviour  of  all, 
whose  faith  it  is,  that  promised  that  Peter's 
faith  should  not  fail  and  exhorted  him  to 
strengthen  his  brethren,  how  it  is  known 
to  all  that  the  Apostolic  pontiffs,  the  pred- 
ecessors of  my  littleness,  have  ahvays  con- 
fidently done  this  very  thing :  of  whom 
also  our  littleness,  since  I  have  received 
this  ministry  by  divine  designation,  wishes 
to  be  the  follower,  although  unequal  to  them 
and  the  least  of  all.  For  woe  is  me,  if  I 
neglect  to  preach  the  truth  of  my  Lord, 
which  they  have  sincerely  preached.  Woe 
is  me,  if  I  cover  over  with  silence  the  truth 
which  I  am  bidden  to  give  to  the  exchangers, 
i.e.,  to  teach  to  the  Christian  people  and 
imbue  it  therewith.  What  shall  I  say 
in  the  future  examination  by  Christ  him- 
self, if  I  blush  (which  God  forbid!)  to 
preach  here  the  truth  of  his  words? 
What  satisfaction  shall  I  be  able  to  give 
for  myself,  what  for  the  souls  committed  to 
me,  when  he  demands  a  strict  account  of 
the  office  I  have  received  ?  Who,  then,  my 
most  clement  and  most  pious  lords  and 
sons,  (I  speak  trembling  and  prostrate  in 
spirit)  would  not  be  stirred  by  that  admi- 
rable promise,  which  is  made  to  the  faith- 
ful:  "Whoever  shall  confess  me  before 
men,  him  also  will  I  confess  before  my 
Father,  who  is  in  heaven "  ?  And  which 
one  even  of  the  infidels  shall  not  be  terri- 
fied by  that  most  severe  threat,  in  which  he 
protests  that  he  will  be  full  of  wrath,  and 
declares  that  "  Whoever  shall  deny  me 
before  men,  him  also  will  I  deny  before  my 
Father,  who  is  in  heaven  "  ?  Whence  also 
blessed  Paul,  the  apostle  of  the  Gentiles, 
gives  warning  and  says  :  "  But  though  we, 
or  an  angel  from  the  heaven  should  preach 
to  you  any  other  Gospel  from  what  we 
have  evangelized  to  you,  let  him  be  anath- 
ema." Since,  therefore,  such  an  extremity 
of  punishment  overhangs  the  corruptors,  or 
suppressors  of  truth  by  silence,  would  not 
any  one  flee  from  an  attempt  at  curtailing 
the  truth  of  the  Lord's  faith  ?  Wherefore 
the  predecessors  of  Apostolic  memory  of 
my  littleness,  learned  in  the  doctrine  of  the 
Lord,  ever  since  the  prelates  of  the  Church 
of  Constantinople  have  been  trying  to 
introduce  into  the  immaculate  Church  of 


Christ  an  heretical  innovation,  have  never 
ceased  to  exhort  and  warn  them  with  many 
prayers,  that  they  should,  at  least  by 
silence,  desist  from  the  heretical  error  of 
the  depraved  dogma,  lest  from  this  they 
make  the  beginning  of  a  split  in  the  unity 
of  the  Church,  by  asserting  one  will,  and 
one  operation  of  the  two  natures  in  the 
one  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord :  a  thing  which 
the  Arians  and  the  Apollinarists,  the  Euty- 
chians,  the  Timotheans,  the  Acephali,  the 
Theodosians  and  the  Gaianitse  taught,  and 
every  heretical  madness,  whether  of  those 
who  confound,  or  of  those  who  divide  the 
mystery  of  the  Incarnation  of  Christ. 
Those  that  confound  the  mystery  of  the 
holy  Incarnation,  inasmuch  as  they  say 
that  there  is  one  nature  of  the  deity  and 
humanity  of  Christ,  contend  that  he  has 
one  will,  as  of  one,  and  (one)  personal 
operation.  But  they  who  divide,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  inseparable  union,  unite 
the  two  natures  which  they  acknowledge 
that  the  Saviour  possesses,  not  however 
in  an  union  which  is  recognized  to  be 
hypostatic;  but  blasphemously  join  them 
by  concord,  through  the  affection  of  the 
will,  like  two  subsistences,  i.e.,  two  some- 
bodies. Moreover,  the  Apostolic  Church 
of  Christ,  the  spiritual  mother  of  your 
God-founded  empire,  confesses  one  Jesus 
Christ  our  Lord  existing  of  and  in  two 
natures,  and  she  maintains  that  his  two 
natures,  to  wit,  the  divine  and  the  human, 
exist  in  him  unconfused  even  after  their 
inseparable  union,  and  she  acknowledges 
that  each  of  these  natures  of  Christ  is  per- 
fect in  the  proprieties  of  its  nature,  and 
she  confesses  that  all  things  belonging  to 
the  proprieties  of  the  natures  are  double, 
because  the  same  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
himself  is  both  perfect  God  and  perfect 
man,  of  two  and  in  two  natures :  and  after 
his  wonderful  Incarnation,  his  deity  cannot 
be  thought  of  without  his  humanity,  nor 
his  humanity  without  his  deity.  Conse- 
quently, therefore,  according  to  the  rule 
of  the  holy  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church 
of  Christ,  she  also  confesses  and  preaches 
that  there  are  in  him  two  natural  wills  and 
two  natural  operations.  For  if  anybody 
should  mean  a  personal  will,  when  in  the 
holy  Trinity  there  are  said  to  be  three  Per- 
sons, it  would  be  necessary  that  there 
should  be  asserted  three  personal  wills,  and 
three  personal  operations  (which  is  absurd 


III.  CONSTANTINOPLE.    A.D.  CS0-G81 


333 


and  truly  profane).  Since,  as  the  truth  of 
the  Christian  faith  holds,  the  will  is  nat- 
ural, where  the  one  nature  of  the  holy  and 
inseparable  Trinity  is  spoken  of,  it  must  be 
consistently  understood  that  there  is  one 
natural  will,  and  one  natural  operation. 
But  when  in  truth  we  confess  that  in  the 
one  person  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  the 
mediator  between  God  and  men,  there  are 
two  natures  (that  is  to  say  the  divine  and 
the  human),  even  after  his  admirable 
union,  just  as  we  canonically  confess  the 
two  natures  of  one  and  the  same  person,  so 
too  we  confess  his  two  natural  wills  and 
two  natural  operations.  But  that  the 
understanding  of  this  truthful  confession 
may  become  clear  to  your  Piety's  mind 
from  the  God-inspired  doctrine  of  the  Old 
and  the  New  Testament,  (for  your  Clemency 
is  incomparably  more  able  to  penetrate  the 
meaning  of  the  sacred  Scriptures,  than  our 
littleness  to  set  it  forth  in  flowing  words), 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  himself,  who  is 
true  and  perfect  God,  and  true  and  per- 
fect man,  in  his  holy  Gospels  shews 
forth  in  some  instances  human  things,  in 
others  divine,  and  still  in  others  both 
together,  making  a  manifestation  concern- 
ing himself  in  order  that  he  might  instruct 
his  faithful  to  believe  and  preach  that  he 
is  both  true  God  and  true  man.  Thus  as 
man  he  prays  to  the  Father  to  take  away 
the  cup  of  suffering,  because  in  him  our 
human  nature  was  complete,  sin  only 
excepted,  "Father,  if  it  be  possible,  let 
this  cup  pass  from  me  ;  nevertheless  not  as 
I  will,  but  as  thou  wilt."  And  in  another 
passage:  "Not  my  will,  but  thine  be 
done."  If  we  wish  to  know  the  meaning  of 
which  testimony  as  explained  by  the  holy 
and  approved  Fathers,  and  truly  to  under- 
stand what  "  my  will,"  what  "  thine " 
signify,  the  blessed  Ambrose  in  his  second 
book  to  the  Emperor  Gratian,  of  blessed 
memory,  teaches  us  the  meaning  of  this 
passage  in  these  words,  saying :  "  He 
then,  receives  my  will,  he  takes  my  sor- 
row, I  confidently  call  it  sorrow  as  I  am 
speaking  of  the  cross,  mine  is  the  will, 
which  he  calls  his,  because  he  bears  my 
sorrow  as  man,  he  spoke  as  a  man,  and 
therefore  he  says  :  '  Not  as  I  will  but  as 
thou  wilt.'  "'  Mine  is  the  sadness  which  he 
has  received   according  to   my  affection.1 

>  Meo  aftectu  :  icar'  e^v  SiaSea-u-. 


See,  most  pious  of  princes,  how  clearly 
here  this  holy  Father  sets  forth  that  the 
words  our  Lord  used  in  his  prayer,  "  Not 
my  will,"  pertain  to  his  humanity  ;  through 
which  also  he  is  said,  according  to  the 
teaching  of  Blessed  Paul  the  Apostle  of 
the  Gentiles,  to  have  "become  obedient 
unto  death,  even  the  death  of  the  Cross." 
Wherefore  also  it  is  taught  us  that  he  was 
obedient  to  his  parents,  which  must  piously 
be  understood  to  refer  to  his  voluntary 
obedience,  not  according  to  his  divinity  (by 
which  he  governs  all  things),  but  according 
to  his  humanity,  by  which  he  spontane- 
ously submitted  himself  to  his  parents. 
St.  Luke  the  Evangelist  likewise  bears  wit- 
ness to  the  same  thing,  telling  how  the 
same  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  prayed  accord- 
ing to  his  humanity  to  his  Father,  and 
said,  "Father,  if  it  be  possible  let  the  cup 
pass  from  me ;  nevertheless  not  my  will  but 
thine  be  done," — which  passage  Athana- 
sius,  the  Confessor  of  Christ,  and  Arch- 
bishop of  the  Church  of  Alexandria,  in  his 
book  against  Apollinaris  the  heretic,  con- 
cerning the  Trinity  and  the  Incarnation, 
also  understanding  the  wills  to  be  two, 
thus  explains :  And  when  he  says,  "Father, 
if  it  be  possible,  let  this  cup  pass  from  me, 
nevertheless  not  my  will  but  thine  be 
done,"  and  again,  "  The  spirit  is  willing, 
but  the  flesh  is  weak  ; "  he  shews  that  there 
are  two  wills,  the  one  human  which  is  the 
will  of  the  flesh,  but  the  other  divine.  For 
his  human  will,  out  of  the  weakness  of  the 
flesh  was  fleeing  away  from  the  passion, 
but  his  divine  will  Avas  ready  for  it.  What 
truer  explanation  could  be  found?  For 
how  is  it  possible  not  to  acknowledge  in 
him  two  wills,  to  wit,  a  human  and  a  divine, 
when  in  him,  even  after  the  inseparable 
union,  there  are  two  natures  according  to 
the  definitions  of  the  synods?  For  John 
also,  who  leaned  upon  the  Lord's  breast,  his 
beloved  disciple,  shews  forth  the  same  self- 
restraint  in  these  words :  "I  came  down 
from  heaven  not  to  do  mine  own  wi  but 
the  will  of  the  Father  that  sent  me."  And 
again  :  "This  is  the  will  of  him  that  sent 
me,  that  of  all  that  he  gave  me  I  should 
lose  nothing,  but  should  raise  it  up  again 
at  the  last  day."  Again  he  introduces 
the  Lord  as  disputing  with  the  Jews,  and 
saying  among  other  things  :  "I  seek  not 
mine  own  will,  but  the  will  of  him  that  sent 
me."  On  the  meaning  of  which  divine  words 


334 


III.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  680-681 


blessed  Augustine,  a  most  illustrious  doc- 
tor, thus  writes  in  his  book  against  Maxi- 
minus  the  Arian.  He  says,  "  When  the 
Son  says  to  the  Father  '  Not  what  I  will, 
but  what  thou  wilt,'  what  doth  it  profit  thee, 
that  thou  broughtest  thy  words  into  sub- 
jection and  sayest,  It  shews  truly  that  his 
will  was  subject  to  his  Father,  as  though 
we  would  deny  that  the  will  of  man  should 
be  subject  to  the  will  of  God?  For  that 
the  Lord  said  this  in  his  human  nature, 
anyone  will  quickly  see  who  studies  atten- 
tively this  place  of  the  Gospel.  For  therein 
he  says,  '  My  soul  is  exceeding  sorrowful 
even  unto  death.'  Can  this  possibly  be 
said  of  the  nature  of  the  One  Word  ?  But, 
O  man,  who  thinkest  to  make  the  nature  of 
the  Holy  Ghost  to  groan,  why  do  you  say 
that  the  nature  of  the  Only-begotten  Word 
of  God  cannot  be  sad  ?  But  to  prevent 
anyone  arguing  in  this  way,  he  does  not 
say  '  I  am  sad ; '  (and  even  if  he  had  so 
said,  it  could  properly  only  have  been 
understood  of  his  human  nature)  but  he 
says  '  My  soul  is  sad,'  which  soul  he  has  as 
man  ;  however  in  this  also  which  he  said, 
'  Not  what  I  Avill '  he  shewed  that  he  willed 
something  different  from  what  the  Father 
did,  which  he  could  not  have  done  except 
in  his  human  nature,  since  he  did  not 
introduce  our  infirmity  into  his  divine 
nature,  but  would  transfigure  human  affec- 
tion. For  had  he  not  been  made  man,  the 
Only  Word  could  in  no  way  have  said  to 
the  Father,  'Not  what  I  will.'  For  it 
could  never  be  possible  for  that  immutable 
nature  to  will  anything  different  from  what 
the  Father  willed.  If  you  would  but  make 
this  distinction,  O  ye  Arians,  ye  would  not 
be  heretics." 

In  this  disputation  this  venerable  Father 
shews  that  when  the  Lord  says  "his  own  " 
he  means  the  will  of  his  humanity,  and 
when  he  says  not  to  do  "  his  own  will,"  he 
teaches  us  not  chiefly  to  seek  our  own  wills 
but  that  through  obedience  we  should  sub- 
mit our  wills  to  the  Divine  Will.  From 
all  which  it  is  evident  that  he  had  a  human 
will  by  which  he  obeyed  his  Father,  and 
that  he  had  in  himself  this  same  human 
will  immaculate  from  all  sin,  as  true  God 
and  man.  Which  thing  St.  Ambrose  also 
thus  treats  of  in  his  explanation  of  St.  Luke 
the  Evangelist. 


{After  this  follows  a  catena  of  Patristic 
quotations  which  I  have  not  thought  wo?'th 
while  to  produce  in  full.  After  St.  Ambrose 
he  cites  /St.  Leo,  then  St.  Gregory  Nazianzen, 
then  St.  Augustine.     (L.  &  C,  col.  647.)] 

From  which  testimonies  it  is  clear  that 
each  of  those  natures  which  the  spiritual 
Doctor  has  here  enumerated  has  its  own 
natural  property,  and  that  to  each  one  a 
will  ought  to  be  assigned.  For  an  angelic 
nature  cannot  have  a  divine  or  a  human 
will,  neither  can  a  human  nature  have  a 
divine  or  an  angelic  will.  For  no  nature 
can  have  anything  or  any  motion  which 
pertains  to  another  nature  but  only  that 
which  is  naturally  given  by  creation.  And 
as  this  is  the  truth  of  the  matter  it  is  most 
certainly  clear  that  we  must  needs  confess 
that  in  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  there  are  two 
natures  and  substances,  to  wit,  the  Divine 
and  human,  united  in  his  one  subsistence 
or  person,  and  that  we  further  confess 
that  there  are  in  him  two  natural  wills, 
viz. :  the  divine  and  the  human,  for  his 
divinity  so  far  as  its  nature  is  concerned 
could  not  be  said  to  possess  a  human  will, 
nor  should  his  humanity  be  believed  to 
have  naturally  a  divine  will :  And  again, 
neither  of  these  two  substances  of  Christ 
must  be  confessed  as  being  without  a 
natural  will ;  but  his  human  will  was  lifted 
up  by  the  omnipotency  of  his  divinity,  and 
his  divine  will  was  revealed  to  men  through 
his  humanity.  Therefore  it  is  necessary  to 
refer  to  him  as  God  such  things  as  are 
divine,  and  as  man  such  things  as  are  hu- 
man ;  and  each  must  be  truly  recognized 
through  the  hypostatic  union  of  the  one 
and  the  same  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  which 
the  most  true  decree  of  the  Council  of 
Chalcedon  sets  forth — [Here  folloivs  cita- 
tion.'] This  same  thing  also  the  holy  synod 
which  was  gathered  together  in  Constanti- 
nople in  the  time  of  the  Emperor  Justinian 
of  august  memory,  teaches  in  the  viith. 
chapter  of  its  definitions.  [Here  folloivs 
the  citation.]  Moreover  it  is  necessary  that 
we  should  faithfully  keep  what  those  Vener- 
able Synods  taught,  so  that  we  never  take 
away  the  difference  of  natures  as  a  result 
of  the  union,  but  confess  one  Christ,  true 
and  perfect  God  and  also  true  and  perfect 
man,  the  propriety  of  each  nature  being 
kept  intact.  Wherefore,  if  in  no  respect 
the  difference  of  the  natures  of  our  Lord 


III.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  680-681 


335 


Jesus  Christ  lias  been  taken  away,  it  is 
necessary  that  we  preserve  this  same  differ- 
ence in  all  its  proprieties.  For  whoso 
teaches  that  the  difference  is  in  no  respect 
to  be  taken  away,  declares  that  it  must  be 
preserved  in  all  things.  But  when  the  here- 
tics and  the  followers  of  heretics  say  that 
there  is  but  one  will  and  one  operation,  how 
is  this  difference  recognized?  Or  where  is 
the  difference  which  has  been  defined  by 
this  holy  Synod  preserved  '?  While  if  it  is 
asserted  that  there  is  but  one  will  in  him 
(which  is  absurd),  those  who  make  this  as- 
sertion must  needs  say  that  that  will  is 
either  human  or  divine,  or  else  composite 
from  both,  mixed  and  confused,  or  (accord- 
ing to  the  teaching  of  all  heretics)  that 
Christ  has  one  will  and  one  operation,  pro- 
ceeding from  his  one  composite  nature  (as 
they  hold).  And  thus,  without  any  doubt, 
the  difference  of  nature  is  destroyed,  which 
the  holy  synods  declared  to  be  preserved  in 
all  respects  even  after  the  admirable  uniou. 
Because,  though  they  taught  that  Christ 
was  one,  his  person  and  substance  one, 
yet  on  account  of  the  union  of  the  natures 
which  was  made  hypostatically,  they  like- 
wise decreed  that  we  should  clearly  ac- 
knowledge and  teach  the  difference  of 
those  natures  which  were  united  in  him, 
after  the  admirable  union.  Therefore  if 
the  proprieties  of  the  natures  in  the  same 
our  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ  were  preserved 
on  account  of  the  difference  [of  the  nat- 
ures], it  is  congruous  that  we  should  with 
full  faith  confess  also  the  difference  of  his 
natural  wills  and  operations,  in  order  that 
we  may  be  shewn  to  have  followed  in  all 
respects  their  doctrine,  and  may  admit  into 
the  Church  of  Christ  no  heretical  novelty. 

And  although  there  exist  numerous  works 
of  the  other  holy  Fathers,  nevertheless  we 
subjoin  to  this  our  humble  exposition  a  few 
testimonies  out  of  the  books  which  are  in 
Greek,  for  the  sake  of  fastidiousness.1 

{Here follows  a  catena  of  passages  from 
the  Greeh  fathers,  viz. :  St.  Gregory  Theolo- 
gus,  St.  Gregory  Nyssen,  St.  John  bishop 
of  Constantinople,  St.  Cyril,  bishop  of  Alex- 
andria.    (L.  &  C,  col.  654.)] 

From  these  truthful  testimonies  it  is  also 
demonstrated  that  these  venerable  fathers 


1  Propter  fastidium,  what  this  may  mean  I  have  no  idea  ;  the 
Greek  i?  still  more  extraordinary :  paBvjxia^  (vel,  papvBviiia^)  xipiv. 


|  predicated  in  the  one  and  the  same  Lord 
j  Jesus  Christ  two  natural  Avills,  viz.  :  a  di- 
vine and  a  human,  for  when  St.  Gregory 
Nazianzen  says,  "  The  willing  of  that  man 
who  is  understood  to  be  the  Saviour,"  he 
shews  that  the  human  will  of  the  Saviour 
was  deified  through  its  union  with  the 
Word,  and  therefore  it  is  not  contrary  to 
God.  So  likewise  he  proves  that  he  had  a 
human,  although  deified  will,  and  this  same 
he  had  (as  he  teaches  in  what  follows)  as 
well  as  his  divine  will,  which  was  one  and 
the  same  with  that  of  the  Father.  If  there- 
fore he  had  a  divine  and  a  deified  will, 
he  had  also  two  wills.  For  what  is  divine 
by  nature  has  no  need  of  being  deified ; 
and  what  is  deified  is  not  truly  divine  by 
nature.  And  when  St.  Gregory  Nyssen,  a 
great  bishop,  sa}'S  that  the  true  confession 
of  the  mystery  is,  that  there  should  be 
understood  one  human  will  and  another  a 
divine  will  in  Christ,  what  does  he  bid  us 
understand  when  he  says  one  and  another 
will,  except  that  there  are  manifestly  two 
wills? 

[He  next  proceeds  to  comment  upon 
the  passage  cited  from  St.  John,  then 
upon  that  from  St.  Cyril  of  Alexandria. 
After  this  follow  quotations  from  St. 
Hilary,  St.  Athanasius,  St.  Denys  the 
Areopagite,  St.  Ambrose,  St.  Leo,  St.  Greg- 
ory Nyssen,  St.  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  which 
are  next  commented  on  in  their  order.  He 
then  proceeds :  (L.  <fe  C,  col.  662.)] 

There  are  not  lacking  most  telling  pas- 
sages in  other  of  the  venerable  fathers, 
who  speak  clearly  of  the  two  natural 
operations  in  Christ,  not  to  mention  St. 
Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  St.  John  of  Constan- 
tinople, or  those  who  afterwards  conducted 
the  laborious  conflicts  in  defence  of  the 
venerable  council  of  Chalcedon  and  of  the 
Tome  of  St.  Leo  against  the  heretics  from 
whose  error  the  assertion  of  this  new  dogma 
has  arisen  :  that  is  to  sa}r,  John,  bishop  of 
Scythopolis,  Eulogius,  bishop  of  Alexan- 
dria, Euphrsemius  and  Anastasius  the  elder, 
most  worthy  rulers  of  the  church  of  Theop- 
olis,  and  above  all  that  emulator  of  the 
true  and  apostolic  faith,  the  Emperor  Jus- 
tinian of  pious  memory,  whose  uprightness 
of  faith  exalted  the  Christian  State  as  much 
as  his  sincere  confession  pleased  God. 
And  his  pious  memory  is  esteemed  worthy 


33G 


III.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  680-081 


of  veneration  by  all  nations,  whose  up- 
rightness of  faith  was  disseminated  with 
praise  throughout  the  whole  world  by  bis 
most  august  edicts :  one  of  these,  to  wit, 
that  addressed  to  Zoilus,  the  patriarch  of 
Alexandria,  against  the  heresy  of  the  Aceph- 
ali  to  satisfy  them  of  the  rectitude  of  the 
apostolic  faith,  we  offer  to  your  most  tran- 
quil  Christianity,  sending  it  together  with 
this  paper  of  our  lowliness  through  the 
same  carriers.  But  lest  this  declaration 
should  be  thought  burdensome  on  account 
of  its  length,  Ave  have  inserted  in  this  decla- 
ration of  our  humility  only  a  few  of  the 
testimonies  of  the  Holy  Fathers,  especially 
[when  writing  to  those]  on  whom  the  care 
and  arrangement  of  the  whole  world  as  on  a 
firm  foundation  are  recognized  to  rest ;  since 
this  is  altogether  incomparable  and  great, 
that  the  care  of  the  whole  Christian  State 
being  laid  aside  for  a  little  out  of  love  and 
zeal  for  true  religion,  your  august  and  most 
religious  clemency  should  desire  to  under- 
stand more  clearly  the  doctrine  of  apostoli- 
cal preaching.  For  from  the  different  ap- 
proved fathers  the  truth  of  the  Orthodox 
faith  has  become  clear  although  the  treat- 
ment is  short.  For  the  approved  fathers 
thought  it  to  be  superfluous  to  discourse  at 
length  upon  what  was  evident  and  clear  to 
all ;  for  who,  even  if  he  be  dull  of  wit,  does 
not  perceive  what  is  evident  to  all  ?  For  it 
is  impossible  and  contrary  to  the  order  of 
nature  that  there  should  be  a  nature  without 
a  natural  operation  :  and  even  the  heretics 
did  not  dare  to  say  this,  although  they 
were,  all  of  them,  hunting  for  human 
craftiness  and  cunning  questions  against 
the  orthodoxy  of  the  faith,  and  arguments 
agreeable  to  their  depravities. 

How  then  can  that  now  be  asserted  which 
never  was  said  by  the  holy  orthodox  fathers, 
nor  even  was  presumptuously  invented  by 
the  profane  heretics,  viz. :  that  of  the  two 
natures  of  Christ,  the  divine  and  the  human, 
the  proprieties  of  each  of  which  are  recog- 
nized as  being  preserved  in  Christ,  that 
anyone  in  sound  mind  should  declare  there 
was  but  one  operation?  Since  if  there  is 
one,  let  them  say  whether  it  be  temporal 
or  eternal,  divine  or  human,  uncreated  or 
created :  the  same  as  that  of  the  Father 
or  different  from  that  of  the  Father.  If 
therefore  it  is  one,  that  one  and  the  same 
must  be  common  to  the  divinity  and 
to  the  humanity  (which  is  absurd),  there- 


fore while  the  Son  of  God,  who  is  both 
God  and  man,  wrought  human  things  on 
earth,  likewise  also  the  Father  worked  with 
him  according  to  his  nature  (naturaliter, 
^uo-(Kois) ;  for  what  things  the  Father  doeth 
these  the  Son  also  doeth  likewise.  But  if 
(as  is  the.  truth)  the  human  acts  which 
Christ  did  are  to  be  referred  to  his  person 
alone  as  the  Son,  which  is  not  the  same  as 
that  of  the  Father ;  in  one  nature  Christ 
worked  one  set  of  Avorks,  and  in  the  other 
another,  so  that  according  to  his  divinity 
the  Son  does  the  same  things  that  the  Father 
does  ;  and  likewise  according  to  his  human- 
ity, what  things  are  proper  to  the  manhood, 
those  same,  he  as  man,  did  because  he  is 
truly  both  God  and  man.  For  which  reason 
we  rightly  believe  that  that  same  person, 
since  he  is  one,  has  two  natural  operations,  to 
wit,  the  divine  and  the  human,  one  uncreated, 
and  the  other  created,  as  true  and  perfect 
God  and  as  true  and  perfect  man,  the  one 
and  the  same,  the  mediator  between  God  and 
men,  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Wherefore 
from  the  quality  of  the  operations  there 
is  recognized  a  difference  void  of  offence 
(d7r/Doo-K07ros)  of  the  natures  which  are  joined 
in  Christ  through  the  hypostatic  union. 
We  now  proceed  to  cite  some  passages  from 
the  execrable  writings  of  the  heretics  hated 
of  God,1  whose  words  and  sayings  we 
equally  abominate,  for  the  demonstration 
of  those  things  which  our  inventors  of  new 
dogma  have  followed  teaching  that  in  Christ 
there  is  but  one  will  and  one  operation. 

[Then  follow  qiiotations  from  Apollinaris, 
Severus,  Theodosius  of  Alexandria.  (L.  & 
C,  col.  667.)] 

Behold,  most  pious  lords  and  sons,  by 
the  testimonies  of  the  holy  Fathers,  as  by 
spiritual  rays,  the  doctrine  of  the  Catho- 
lic and  Apostolic  Church  has  been  illus- 
trated and  the  darkness  of  heretical  blind- 
ness, which  is  offering  error  to  men  for 
imitation,  has  been  revealed.  Now  it  is 
necessary  that  the  new  doctrine  shoidd  fol- 
low somebody,  and  by  whose  authority  it 
is  supported,  we  shall  note. 

[Here  follow  quotations  from  Cyrus  of 
Alexandria,  Theodore  of  Pharon,  Sergius  of 
Constantinople,  Pyrrhus,  Paulus  Ms  succes- 

i  The  meaning  of  this  passage  is  clear  enough  but  the  text  is 
slightly  corrupt. 


which  for  *.  ScSelrte^KS 
people  you  have  bee,,  deemed  worths  toT 

one  of  J  t^1Gl?Ce  °£  G°d-  '•*>  heed  whict 
one  of  such  doctors  you  think  th*  ni    -7- 

S  sld  -To,'1^  sWi embraee  so « «S 

me  rf  them  ityfuademu  a11'  ™d  «°h 
une   01  tneni  the  other,  according  as  the 

various  aud  unstable  definitions \  their 
Sf3MSerf  som*"»*  'lat  there  is  one 

fore  the  Holy  Church  of  God,  the  m^W 
of  your  most  Christian  power   should  lS 

?thiVeild  a»\libe^d  wfth  all'yt^lht 
(through  the  help  of  God)  from  the  Srors 
of  such  teachers,  and  the  evaugeHcal ml 
apostolic  uprightness  of  the  orthodox  faih 
which  has  been  established  upon  the  fi™ 
rock  of  this  Church  of  blessed  Pp/I  f. 
Prmee  of  the  Apostles,  whto^%^ 

101,  [that  faith  I  say]  the  whole  nnmW Zt 
nders  and  priests,  of  the  clergj ^nd  of  the 
people,   unanimously  should  confess  and 

GorltP?+  llC  tradltl0*>  m  order  to  please 
God  and  to  save  their  own  souls.       P 

instS in Zfnf  76  ]]aVe  taken  Pai»*  to 
insert  m  the  tractate  of  our  humilitv  f™ 

we  have  been  afflicted  and  CT^led 

without  ceasing  that  such  grievous  enors 

should  be  entertained  by  bishops  of  the 

owTtVnr  °  aVQ  Zeal°US  io  -tablish  th  ir 
Jf,  P|c.^Jlar  views  rather  than  the  troth 

»|-f-h^£iS 

SS^^SntiS 
recentwoundmightreceivearemed^moved 


thereto  not  by  a  mind  filled  with  hatred 
(God  is  my  witness)  nor  through  the  elation 
of  boasting,  nor  through  the  Sppositinn Z 
contention,  nor  through  an  Lane  desire  to 
find  some  fa.lt  witlAheir  teachings    nJr 
through  anything  akin  to  the  love  of  arro 
gance ,  bu  tout  of  zeal  for  the  uprilw 
of  the  truth,  and  for  the  rule  of  theTonfes 
sion  of  the  pure  Gospel,  and  for  the  sTlva 

CW   ""ft  and  fo*  tfle  «tabili^  of  the' 

wh?    fVta4e'  and  for  the  safety  of  those 

et  e™  "om  ?lB°maf  ^^     *«  did  th!j 

duration  o S"  adrmti0nS  aftertlie  long 
auration  of  this  domesticated  error  but 
always  exhorted  and  bore  record  and  that 
with  fraternal  charity,  not  through  malice 
or  pertinacious  hatred  (far  be  £: LS 

wl "n1haenToa?  \01;?i°icei  at  a^ther?fS! 

the  death^?  f      ^  te?cheS'  "  T  des^  no 
me  oleatli  ot  a  sinner,  but  that  he  be  mn 

verted  and  live;"  and  who  rejoiceth  over" 

luetyancl-nme     ust   persons:   who  came 
down  from  heaven  to  earth  to  del  ver  the 

3J t       nng  3them  with  outstretched 
spiritual  arms,    and  exhorting  to  embiZl 

doffaltTl  t0  *£  ***  0f  the  orSo! 
clox  faith    and   awaiting  their   conversion 

ha^twreCt^de  °f  the  °^odox  fa S 
that  they  might  not  make  themselves 
aliens  from  our  communion,  that  £  E 
the  communion  of  blessed  Peter  the  ApoS 
tie,  whose  ministry,  we  (though  unworthy) 
exercise,  and  preach  the  faith  he  lalhan? 
ed  down,  but  that  they  should  MoK?" 
with  us  pray  Christ  the  Lord the  Ztl 
sacrifice,  for  the  stability  of  you?  most 
strong  and  serene  Empire!  J 

the r^feS  Pio"s  lords  [singular  in 
tne  i^atm]  of  all  things,  that  there  has  been 
left  no  possible  ambiguity  which  can™* 

lowed hf/eC?gmTg  °f  ,tW  who  ^e  fol 
lowed  the  inventors  of  new  dogma.     For 

w  hX^T  °f  ^Piritnal  -^standing 
with _  which  the  sayings  of  the  Fathers  are 
full  has  become  evident  to  the  eyes  of  aD 

Sop  hS  if  ■'  hf  be.en  made  notorious. 

Wn       *  remTed  unknown  that  the  in- 
ventors of  new  dogma  have  been  shewn  to 

walkers  nt°r?  ?fberetics>  **d  not  the 

ers    SI      fi°°tstepS  0f  the  h<*7  Fath- 
eis  .  therefore  whoever  wishes  to  colour  onv 

S  0/,hlstlwhat^er,  is  condemned  by  tne 
light  of  truth,  as  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles 


338 


III.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  680-681 


says,  "For  everything  that  doth  make  man- 
ifest is  light,"  for  the  truth  ever  remains 
constant  and  the  same,  but  falsehood  is 
ever  varying,  and  in  its  wanderings  adopt- 
ing things  mutually  contradictory.  On  this 
account  the  inventors  of  the  new  dogma 
have  been  shewn  to  have  taught  things  mut- 
ually contradictory,  because  they  were  not 
willing  to  be  followers  of  the  Evangelical 
and  Apostolic  faith.  Wherefore  since  the 
truth  has  shone  forth  by  the  observations 
of  your  God-inspired  piety,  and  falsity 
which  has  been  exposed  has  attained  the 
contempt  which  it  deserved,  it  remains  that 
the  crowned  truth  may  shine  forth  victori- 
ously through  the  pious  favours  of  your 
God-crowned  clemency  ;  and  that  the  error 
of  novelty  with  its  inventors  and  with  those 
who  follow  their  doctrine,  may  receive  the 
punishment  due  their  presumption,  and  be 
cast  forth  from  the  midst  of  the  orthodox 
prelates  for  the  heretical  pravity  of  their 
innovation,  which  into  the  holy,  Catholic  and 
Apostolic  Church  of  Christ  they  have  en- 
deavoured to  introduce,  and  to  stain  with  the 
contagion  of  heretical  pravity  the  indivisible 
and  unspotted  body  of  the  Church  [of  Christ] . 
For  it  is  not  just  that  the  injurious  should 
injure  the  innocent,  nor  that  the  offences 
of  some  should  be  visited  upon  the  inoffen- 
sive, for  even  if  in  this  world  to  the  con- 
demned mercy  is  extended,  yet  they  who 
are  thus  spared  reap  for  that  sparing  no 
benefit  in  the  judgment  of  God,  and  by  those 
thus  sparing  them  there  is  incurred  no  little 
danger  for  their  unlawful  compassion. 

But  we  believe  that  Almighty  God  has 
reserved  for  the  happy  days  of  your  gentle- 
ness the  amending  of  these  things,  that 
filling  on  earth  the  place  and  zeal  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  himself,  who  has  vouch- 
safed to  crown  your  rule,  ye  may  judge  just 
judgment  for  his  Evangelical  and  Apostoli- 
cal truth  :  for  although  he  be  the  Redeemer 
and  Saviour  of  the  human  race  yet  he  suf- 
fered injury,  and  bore  it  even  until  now,  and 
inspired  the  empire  of  your  fortitude,  so  that 
you  should  be  worthy  to  follow  the  cause  of 
his  faith  (as  equity  demanded,  and  as  the  de- 
termination of  the  Holy  Fathers  and  of  the 
Five  General  Synods  decreed),  and  that  you 
should  avenge,  through  his  guardianship, 
on  the  spurners  of  his  faith,  the  injury  done 
your  Redeemer  and  Colleague  in  reigning, 
thus  fulfilling  magnanimously  with  impe- 
rial clemency  that  prophetic  utterance  with 


which  David  the  King  and  Prophet,  spake 
to  God,  saying,  ' '  The  zeal  of  thine  house 
hath  eaten  me  up."  Wherefore  having  been 
extolled  for  so  God-pleasing  a  zeal,  he  was 
deemed  fit  to  hear  that  blessed  word 
spoken  by  the  Creator  of  all  men,  "  I  have 
found  David,  a  man  after  my  heart,  who 
will  do  all  my  will."  And  to  him  also  it 
was  promised  in  the  Psalms,  "I  have  found 
David,  my  servant,  with  my  holy  oil  have  I 
anointed  him  :  My  hand  shall  aid  him  and 
my  arm  shall  comfort  him,"  so  that  the  most 
pious  majesty  of  your  Christian  clemency 
may  work  to  further  the  cause  of  Christ 
with  burning  zeal  for  the  sake  of  remuner- 
ation, and  may  he  make  all  the  acts  of  your 
most  powerful  empire  both  happy  and 
prosperous,  who  hath  stored  up  his  promise 
in  the  Holy  Gospels,  saying,  "  Seek  ye  first 
the  kingdom  of  God  and  all  these  things 
shall  be  added  unto  you."  For  all,  to  whom 
has  come  the  knowledge  of  the  sacred 
heads,1  have  been  offering  innumerable 
thanksgivings  and  unceasing  praises  to  the 
defender  of  your  most  powerful  dominion, 
being  filled  with  admiration  for  the  great- 
ness of  your  clemency,  in  that  you  have  so 
benignly  set  forth  the  kind  intention  of 
your  august  magnanimity  ;  for  in  truth,  as 
most  pious  and  most  just  princes,  you  have 
deigned  to  treat  divine  things  with  the 
fear  of  God,  having  promised  every  immun- 
ity to  those  persons  sent  to  you  from  our 
littleness. 

And  we  are  confident  that  what  your 
pious  clemency  has  promised,  you  are  pow- 
erful to  carry  out,  in  order  that  what  has 
been  vowed  and  promised  to  God  by  the 
religious  philanthropy  beyond  your  Chris- 
tian power,  may  nevertheless  be  fulfilled  by 
the  aid  of  his  omnipotency. 

Wherefore  let  praise  by  all  Christian  na- 
tions, and  eternal  memory,  and  frequent 
prayer  be  poured  forth  before  the  Lord 
Christ,  whose  is  the  cause,  for  your  safety, 
and  your  triumphs,  and  your  complete  vic- 
tory, that  the  nations  of  the  Gentiles,  being 
impressed  by  the  terror  of  the  supernal 
majesty,  may  lay  down  most  humbly  their 
necks  beneath  the  sceptre  of  your  most 
powerful  rule,  that  the  power  of  your  most 
pious  kingdom  may  continue  until  the 
ceaseless  joy  of  the  eternal  kingdom  suc- 
ceeds to  this  temporal  reign.    Nor  could 


1  I.e.,  the  imperial  edicts. 


III.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  680-681 


339 


anything  be  found  more  likely  to  commend 
the  clemency  of  your  unconquerable  forti- 
tude to  the  divine  majesty,  than  that  those 
who  err  from  the  rule  of  truth  should  be  re- 
pelled and  the  integrity  of  our  Evangelical 
and  Apostolic  faith  should  be  everywhere 
set  forth  and  preached. 

Moreover,  most  pious  and  God-instructed 
sons  and  lords,  if  the  Archbishop  of  the 
Church  of  Constantinople  shall  choose  to 
hold  and  to  preach  with  us  this  most  un- 
blameable  rule  of  Apostolic  doctrine  of  the 
Sacred  Scriptures,  of  the  venerable  synods, 
of  the  spiritual  Fathers,  according  to  their 
evangelical  understanding,  through  which 
the  form  of  the  truth  has  been  set  forth  by 
us  through  the  assistance  of  the  Spirit, 
there  will  ensue  great  peace  to  them  that 
love  the  name  of  God,  and  there  will  re- 
main no  scandal  of  dissension,  and  that  will 
come  to  pass  which  is  recorded  in  the  Acts 
of  the  Apostles,  when  through  the  grace  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  the  people  had  come  to  the 
acknowledging  of  Christianity,  all  of  us  will 
be  of  one  heart  and  of  one  mind.  But  if 
(which  God  forbid  !)  he  shall  prefer  to  em- 
brace the  novelty  but  lately  introduced  by 
others  ;  and  shall  ensnare  himself  with  doc- 
trines which  are  alien  to  the  rule  of  ortho- 
dox truth  and  of  our  Apostolic  faith,  to 
decline  which  as  injurious  to  souls  these 
have  put  off,  despite  the  exhortation  and 
admonitions  of  our  predecessors  in  the 
Apostolic  See,  down  to  this  day,  he  him- 
self should  know  what  kind  of  an  answer 
he  will  have  to  give  for  such  contempt 
in  the  divine  examination  of  Christ  before 
the  judge  of  all,  who  is  in  heaven,  to  whom 
when  he  cometh  to  judgment  also  we  our- 
selves are  about  to  give  an  account  of  the 
ministry  of  preaching  the  truth  which  has 
been  committed  to  us,  or  for  the  toleration 
of  things  contrary  to  the  Christian  religion  : 
and  may  we  (as  I  humbly  pray)  preserve 
unconfusedly  and  freely,  with  simplicity  and 
purity,  whole  and  undefiled,  the  Apostolic 
and  Evangelical  rule  of  the  right  faith  as 


we  have  received  it  from  the  beginning. 
And  may  your  most  august  serenity,  for  the 
affection  and  reverence  which  you  bear  to 
the  Catholic  and  Apostolic  right  faith,  re- 
ceive the  perfect  reward  of  your  pious  la- 
bours from  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  himself, 
the  ruler  with  you  of  your  Christian  empire, 
whose  true  confession  you  desire  to  pre- 
serve undefiled,  because  nothing  in  any  re- 
spect has  been  neglected  or  omitted  by  your 
God-crowned  clemency,  which  could  minis- 
ter to  the  peace  of  the  churches,  provided 
always  that  the  integrity  of  the  true  faith 
was  maintained :  since  God,  the  Judge  of 
all,  who  disposes  the  ending  of  all  matters 
as  he  deems  most  expedient,  seeks  out  the 
intent  of  the  heart,  and  will  accept  a  zeal  for 
piety.  Therefore  I  exhort  you,  O  most  pious 
and  clement  Emperor,  and  together  with  my 
littleness  every  Christian  man  exhorts  you 
on  bended  knee  with  all  humility,  that  to  all 
the  God-pleasing  goodnesses  and  admirable 
imperial  benefits  which  the  heavenly  con- 
descension has  vouchsafed  to  grant  to  the 
human  race  through  your  God-accepted 
care,  this  also  you  would  order,  for  the  re- 
dintegration of  perfect  piety,  to  offer  an  ac- 
ceptable sacrifice  to  Christ  the  Lord  your 
fellow-ruler,  granting  entire  impunity,  and 
free  faculty  of  speech  to  each  one  wishing 
to  speak,  and  to  urge  a  word  in  defence  of 
the  faith  which  he  believes  and  holds,  so 
that  it  may  most  manifestly  be  recognized 
by  all  that  by  no  terror,  by  no  force,  by  no 
threat  or  aversion  any  one  wishing  to  speak 
for  the  truth  of  the  Catholic  and  Apostolic 
faith,  has  been  prohibited  or  repulsed,  and 
that  all  unanimously  may  glorify  your  im- 
perial (divinam)  majesty,  throughout  the 
whole  space  of  their  lives  for  so  great  and 
so  inestimable  a  good,  and  may  pour  forth 
unceasing  prayers  to  Christ  the  Lord  that 
your  most  strong  empire  may  be  preserved 
untouched  and  exalted.  The  Subscription. 
May  the  grace  from  above  keep  your  em- 
pire, most  pious  lords,  and  place  beneath 
its  feet  the  neck  of  all  the  nations. 


z  2 


THE  LETTER  OF  AGATHO  AND  OF  THE  ROMAN  SYNOD  OF 
125  BISHOPS  WHICH  WAS  TO  SERVE  AS  AN  INSTRUC- 
TION TO  THE  LEGATES  SENT  TO  ATTEND  THE  SIXTH 
SYNOD. 


{Found  in  Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  VI.,  col.  677  et  seqq,,  and  in  Migne, 
Pat.  Lat.,  Tom.  LXXXVII,  col.  1215  et  seqq.  [This  last  text,  ivhich  is  Mansi's,  I  have 
followed}.) 


To  the  most  pious  Lords  and  most  serene 
victors  and  conquerors,  our  own  sons  beloved 
of  God  and  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  Con- 
stantine,  the  great  Emperor,  and  Heraclius 
and  Tiberius,  Augustuses,  Agatho,  the  bish- 
op and  servant  of  the  servants  of  God,  to- 
gether with  all  the  synods  subject  to  the 
council  of  the  Apostolic  See. 

[The  Letter  opens  with  cc  number  of  com- 
pliments to  the  Emperor,  much  in  style  and 
matter  like  the  introduction  of  the  preceding 
letter.  I  have  not  thought  it  worth  while  to 
translate  this,  hit  have  begun  at  the  doctrinal 
j>art,  which  is  given  to  the  reader  in  full. 
(Labbe  and  Cossart,  col.  682.)] 

We  believe  in  God  the  Father  Almighty, 
maker  of  heaven  and  earth,  and  of  all  things 
visible  and  invisible ;  and  in  his  only -be- 
gotten Son,  who  was  begotten  of  him  before 
all  worlds ;  very  God  of  Very  God,  Light 
of  Light,  begotten  not  made,  being  of  one 
substance  with  the  Father,  that  is  of  the 
same  substance  as  the  Father ;  by  him  were 
all  things  made  which  are  in  heaven  and 
which  are  in  earth  ;  and  in  the  Holy  Ghost, 
the  Lord  and  giver  of  life,  who  proceedeth 
from  the  Father,  and  with  the  Father  and 
the  Son  together  is  worshipped  and  glori- 
fied; the  Trinity  in  unity  and  Unity  in 
trinity;  a  unity  so  far  as  essence  is  con- 
cerned, but  a  trinity  of  persons  or  subsis- 
tences ;  and  so  we  confess  God  the  Father, 
God  the  Son,  and  God  the  Holy  Ghost; 
not  three  gods,  but  one  God,  the  Father, 
the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost :  not  a  sub- 
sistency  of  three  names,  but  one  substance 
of  three  subsistences ;  and  of  these  per- 
sons one  is  the  essence,  or  siabstance  or 
nature,  that  is  to  say  one  is  the  godhead, 
one  the  eternity,  one  the  power,  one  the 
kingdom,  one  the  glory,  one  the  adoration, 
one  the  essential  will  and  operation  of  the 


same  Holy  and  inseparable  Trinity,  which 
hath  created  all  things,  hath  made  disposi- 
tion of  them,  and  still  contains  them. 

Moreover  we  confess  that  one  of  the  same 
holy  consubstantial  Trinity,  God  the  Word, 
who  was  begotten  of  the  Father  before  the 
worlds,  in  the  last  days  of  the  world  for  us 
and  for  our  salvation  came  down  from  heav- 
en, and  was  incarnate  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
and  of  our  Lady,  the  holy,  immaculate, 
ever-virgin  and  glorious  Mary,  truly  and 
properly  the  Mother  of  God,  that  is  to  say 
according  to  the  flesh  which  was  bom  of 
her ;  and  was  truly  made  man,  the  same  be- 
ing very  God  and  very  man.  God  of  God 
his  Father,  but  man  of  his  Virgin  Mother, 
incarnate  of  her  flesh  with  a  reasonable  and 
intelligent  soul :  of  one  substance  with  God 
the  Father,  as  touching  his  godhead,  and 
consubstantial  with  lis  as  touching  his  man- 
hood, and  in  all  points  like  unto  us,  but 
without  sin.  He  was  crucified  for  us  under 
Pontius  Pilate,  he  suffered,  was  buried  and 
rose  again;  ascended  into  heaven,  and 
sitteth  at  the  right  hand  of  the  Father,  and 
he  shall  come  again  to  judge  both  the  quick 
and  the  dead,  and  of  his  kingdom  there 
shall  be  no  end. 

And  this  same  one  Lord  of  ours,  Jesus 
Christ,  the  only-begotten  Son  of  God,  we 
acknowledge  to  subsist  of  and  in  two  sub- 
stances unconfusedly,  unchangeably,  indi- 
visibly,  inseparably,  the  difference  of  the 
natures  being  by  no  means  taken  away  by 
the  union,  but  rather  the  proprieties  of  each 
nature  being  preserved  and  concurring  in 
one  Person  and  one  Subsistence,  not  scat- 
tered or  divided  into  two  Persons,  nor  con- 
fused into  one  composite  nature ;  but  we 
confess  one  and  the  same  only-begotten  Son, 
God  the  Word,  our  Lord  Jesns  Christ,  not 
one  in  another,  nor  one  added  to  another, 
but  himself  the  same  in  two  natures — that 
is  to  say  in  the  Godhead  and  in  the  man- 


III.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  680-681 


341 


hood  even  after  the  hypostatic  union :  for 
neither  was  the  Word  changed  into  the  nat- 
ure of  flesh,  nor  was  the  flesh  transformed 
into  the  nature  of  the  "Word,  for  each  re- 
mained what  it  was  by  nature.  We  discern 
by  contemplation  alone  the  distinction  be- 
tween the  natures  united  in  him  of  which 
inconfusedly,  inseparably  and  unchangeably 
he  is  composed ;  for  one  is  of  both,  and 
through  one  both,  because  there  are  to- 
gether both  the  height  of  the  deity  and  the 
humility  of  the  flesh,  each  nature  preserv- 
ing after  the  union  its  own  proper  character 
without  any  defect ;  and  each  form  acting 
in  communion  with  the  other  what  is  proper 
to  itself.  The  Word  working  what  is  proper 
to  the  Word,  and  the  flesh  what  is  proper 
to  the  flesh  ;  of  which  the  one  shines  with 
miracles,  the  other  bows  down  beneath  in- 
juries. Wherefore,  as  we  confess  that  he 
truly  has  two  natures  or  substances,  viz. : 
the  Godhead  and  the  manhood,  inconfused- 
ly, indivisibly  and  unchangeably  [united], 
so  also  the  rule  of  piety  instructs  us  that  he 
has  two  natural  wills  and  two  natural  oper- 
ations, as  perfect  God  and  perfect  man,  one 
and  the  same  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  And 
this  the  apostolic  and  evangelical  tradition 
and  the  authority  of  the  Holy  Fathers 
(whom  the  Holy  Apostolic  and  Catholic 
Church  and  the  venerable  Synods  receive), 
has  plainly  taught  us. 

\The  letter  goes  on  to  say  that  this  is  the 
traditional  faith,  and  is  that  which  was  set 
forth  in  a  council  over  which  Pope  Martin 
presided,  and  that  those  opposed  to  this  faith 
have  erred  from  the  truth,  some  in  one  way, 
and  some  in  another.  It  next  apologizes 
for  the  delay  in  sending  the  persons  ordered 
by  the  imperial  Sacra,  and  proceeds  thus : 
(Labbe  and  Cossart,  col.  686 ;  Migne,  col. 
1224).] 

In  the  first  place,  a  great  number  of  us 
are  spread  over  a  vast  extent  of  country 
even  to  the  sea  coast,  and  the  length  of  their 


journey  necessarily  took  much  time.  More- 
over Ave  were  in  hopes  of  being  able  to  join 
to  our  humility  our  fellow-servant  and 
brother  bishop,  Theodore,  the  archbishop 
and  philosopher  of  the  island  of  Great  Brit- 
ain, with  others  who  have  been  kept  there 
even  till  to-day  ;  and  to  add  to  these  divers 
bishops  of  this  council  who  have  their  sees  in 
different  parts,  that  our  humble  suggestion 
[i.e.,  the  doctrinal  definition  contained  in 
the  letters]  might  proceed  from  a  council  of 
wide-spread  influence,  lest  if  only  a  part 
were  cognizant  of  what  was  being  done,  it 
might  escape  the  notice  of  a  part ;  and  es- 
pecially because  among  the  Gentiles,  as  the 
Longobards,  and  the  Sclavi,  as  also  the 
Franks,  the  French,  the  Goths,  and  the 
Britains,  there  are  known  to  be  very  many 
of  our  fellow-servants  who  do  not  cease 
curiously  to  enquire  on  the  subject,  that  they 
may  know  what  is  being  done  in  the  cause 
of  the  Apostolic  faith  :  who  as  they  can  be  of 
advantage  so  long  as  they  hold  the  true  faith 
with  us,  and  think  in  unison  with  us,  so  are 
they  found  troublesome  and  contrary,  if 
(which  may  God  forbid !)  they  stumble  at  any 
article  of  the  faith.  But  we,  although  most 
humble,  yet  strive  with  all  our  might  that 
the  commonwealth  of  your  Christian  empire 
may  be  shown  to  be  more  sublime  than 
all  the  nations,  for  in  it  has  been  founded 
the  See  of  Blessed  Peter,  the  prince  of 
the  Apostles,  by  the  authority  of  which,  all 
Christian  nations  venerate  and  worship  with 
us,  through  the  reverence  of  the  blessed 
Apostle  Peter  himself.  {This  is  the  Latin, 
which  appears  to  me  to  be  corrupt,  the  Greek 
reads  as  folloios :  "  The  authority  of  which 
for  the  truth,  all  the  Christian  nations  to- 
gether with  us  worship  and  revere,  accord- 
ing to  the  honour  of  the  blessed  Peter  the 
Apostle  himself.") 

[The  letter  ends  with  prayers  for  con- 
stancy, and  blessings  on  the  State  and  Em- 
peror, and  hopes  for  the  universal  diffusion 
and  acceptance  of  the  truth.'] 


EXTRACTS  FROM  THE  ACTS. 


SESSION  VIII. 


(Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  VI.,  col.  730.) 


[The  Emperor  said] 

Let  George,  the  most  holy  archbishop  of 
this  our  God-preserved  city,  and  let  Maca- 
rius, the  venerable  archbishop  of  Antioch, 
and  let  the  synod  subject  to  them  [i.e.,  their 
suffragans]  say,  if  they  submit  to  the  force 
(el  cnoiypvGi  rfi  Svvdfxet)  of  the  suggestions 
sent  by  the  most  holy  Agatho  Pope  of  Old * 
Rome  and  by  his  Synod. 

[The  answer  of  George,  with  which  all  his 
bishops,  many  of  them  speaking  one  by  one, 
agreed  except  Theodore  of  Metilene  (who 
handed  in  his  assent  at  the  end  of  the  Tenth 
Session).'] 

I  have  diligently  examined  the  whole 
force  of  the  suggestions  sent  to  your  most 
pious  Fortitude,  as  well  by  Agatho,  the  most 
holy  Pope  of  Old x  Rome,  as  by  his  synod, 
and  I  have  scrutinized  the  works  of  the 
holy  and  approved  Fathers,  which  are  laid 
up  in  my  venerable  patriarchate,  and  I 
have  found  that  all  the  testimonies  of  the 
holy  and  accepted  Fathers,  which  are  con- 
tained in  those  suggestions  agree  with,  and 
in  no  particular  differ  from,  the  holy  and 
accepted  Fathers.  Therefore  I  give  my 
submission  to  them  and  thus  I  profess  and 
believe. 

[  The  answer  of  all  the  rest  of  the  Bishops 


subject  to  the  See  of  Constantinople.     (Col. 
735.)] 

And  we,  most  pious  Lord,  accepting  the 
teaching  of  the  suggestion  sent  to  your  most 
gentle  Fortitude  by  the  most  holy  and 
blessed  Agatho,  Pope  of  Old  Rome,  and  of 
that  other  suggestion  which  was  adopted  by 
the  council  subject  to  him,  and  following 
the  sense  therein  contained,  so  we  are 
minded,  so  we  profess,  and  so  we  believe 
that  in  our  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  our  true 
God,  there  are  two  natures  unconfusedly, 
unchangeably,  undmdedly,  and  two  natural 
wills  and  two  natural  operations  ;  and  all 
who  have  taught,  and  who  now  say,  that 
there  is  but  one  will  and  one  operation  in 
the  two  natures  of  our  one  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  our  true  God,  we  anathematize. 

[The  Emperor 's  demand  to  Macarius. 
(Col.  739.)] 

Let  Macarius,  the  Venerable  Archbishop 
of  Antioch,  who  has  uoav  heard  what  has 
been  said  by  this  holy  and  Ecumenical  Sy- 
nod [demanding  the  expression  of  his  faith], 
answer  what  seemeth  him  good. 

[  The  answer  of  Macarius.] 

I  do  not  say  that  there  are  two  will's  or 
two  operations  in  the  dispensation  of  the 
incarnation  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  but 
one  will  and  one  theandric  operation. 


THE  SENTENCE  AGAINST  THE  MONOTHELTTES. 


SESSION  XIII. 


(L.  and  C,  Concilia,  Tom.  VI.,  col.  943.) 


The  holy  council  said :  After  we  had  re- 
considered, according  to  our  promise  which 
we  had  made  to  your  highness,  the  doctrinal 
letters  of  Sergius,  at  one  time  patriarch  of 
this  royal  god-protected  city  to  Cyrus,  who 


was  then  bishop  of  Phasis  and  to  Honorius 
some  time  Pope  of  Old  Rome,  as  well  as  the 
letter  of  the  latter  to  the  same  Sergius,  we 
find  that  these  documents  are  quite  foreign 
to  the  apostolic  dogmas,  to  the  declarations 


1  "  Old  "  omitted  in  Latin. 


III.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  680-681 


343 


of  the  holy  Councils,  and  to  all  the  accepted 
Fathers,  and  that  they  folloAv  the  false 
teachings  of  the  heretics ;  therefore  we  en- 
tirely reject  them,  and  execrate  them  as 
hurtful  to  the  soul.  But  the  names  of  those 
men  whose  doctrines  we  execrate  must  also 
be  thrust  forth  from  the  holy  Church  of 
God,  namely,  that  of  Sergius  some  time 
bishop  of  this  God-preserved  royal  city 
who  was  the  first  to  write  on  this  impi- 
ous doctrine ;  also  that  of  Cyrus  of  Alex- 
andria, of  Pyrrhus,  Paul,  and  Peter,  who 
died  bishops  of  this  God-preserved  city, 
and  were  like-minded  with  them  ;  and  that 
of  Theodore  sometime  bishop  of  Pharan, 
all  of  whom  the  most  holy  and  thrice  blessed 
Agatho,  Pope  of  Old  Eome,  in  his  sugges- 
tion to  our  most  pious  and  God-preserved 
lord  and  mighty  Emperor,  rejected,  because 
they  were  minded  contrary  to  our  orthodox 


faith,  all  of  whom  we  define  are  to  be  sub- 
jected to  anathema.  And  with  these  we 
define  that  there  shall  be  expelled  from  the 
holy  Church  of  God  and  anathematized 
Honorius  who  was  some  time  Pope  of  Old 
Eome,  because  of  what  we  found  written  by 
him  to  Sergius,  that  in  all  respects  he  fol- 
lowed his  view  and  confirmed  his  impious 
doctrines.  We  have  also  examined  the  sy- 
nodal letter  of  Sophronius  of  holy  memory, 
some  time  Patriarch  of  the  Holy  City  of 
Christ  our  God,  Jerusalem,  and  have  found 
it  in  accordance  with  the  true  faith  and  with 
the  Apostolic  teachings,  and  with  those  of 
the  holy  approved  Fathers.  Therefore  we 
have  received  it  as  orthodox  and  as  salutary 
to  the  holy  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church, 
and  have  decreed  that  it  is  right  that  his 
name  be  inserted  in  the  diptychs  of  the  Holy 
Churches, 


SESSION  XVI. 


(Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  VI.,  col.  1010.) 


[The  Acclamations  of  the  Fathers.'] 

Many  years  to  the  Emperor !  Many 
years  to  Constantine,  our  great  Emperor ! 
Many  years  to  the  Orthodox  King !  Many 
years  to  our  Emperor  that  raaketh  peace  ! 
Many  years  to  Constantine,  a  second  Mar- 
tian! Many  years  to  Constantine,  a  new 
Theodosius  !  Many  years  to  Constantine, 
a  new  Justinian  !  Many  years  to  the  keep- 
er of  the  orthodox  faith !  O  Lord  preserve 
the  foundation  of  the  Churches  !  O  Lord 
preserve  the  keeper  of  the  faith  ! 

Many  years  to  Agatho,  Pope  of  Rome ! 
Many  years  to  George,  Patriarch  of  Con- 
stantinople !  Many  years  to  Theophanus, 
Patriarch  of  Antioch  !  Many  years  to  the 
orthodox  council !  Many  years  to  the  or- 
thodox Senate! 


To  Theodore  of  Pharan,  the  heretic, 
anathema !  To  Sergius,  the  heretic,  anath- 
ema !  To  Cyrus,  the  heretic,  anathema !  To 
Honorius,  the  heretic,  anathema !  To  Pyr- 
rhus, the  heretic,  anathema ! 


To  Paul 

To  Peter  _ 

To  Macarius 

To  Stephen 

To  Polychronius 

To  Apergius  of  Perga 


the  heretic,  anath- 
ema! 


To   all  heretics,  anathema !     To   all   who 
side  with  heretics,  anathema  ! 

May  the  faith  of  the  Christians  increase, 
and  long  years  to  the  orthodox  and  Ecu- 
menical Council ! 


THE  DEFINITION  OF  FAITH. 


(Found  in  the  Acts,  Session  XVIII.,  L.  and  C,  Concilia,  Tom.  VI.,  col.  1019.) 


The  holy,  great,  and  Ecumenical  Synod 
which  has  been  assembled  by  the  grace  of 
God,  and  the  religious  decree  of  the  most 
religious  and  faithful  and  mighty  Sovereign 
Constantine,  in  this  God-protected  and 
royal  city  of  Constantinople,  New  Rome,  in 
the  Hall  of  the  imperial  Palace,  called  Trul- 
lus,  has  decreed  as  follows. 

The  only-begotten  Son,  and  Word  of  God 
the  Father,  who  was  made  man  in  all  things 
like  unto  us  without  sin,  Christ  our  true 
God,  has  declared  expressly  in  the  words 
of  the  Gospel,  "  I  am  the  light  of  the  world ; 
he  that  followeth  me  shall  not  walk  in  dark- 
ness, but  shall  have  the  light  of  life."  And 
again,  "  My  peace  I  leave  with  yon,  my 
peace  I  give  unto  you."  Our  most  gentle 
Sovereign,  the  champion  of  orthodoxy,  and 
opponent  of  evil  doctrine,  being  reverential- 
ly led  by  this  divinely  uttered  doctrine  of 
peace,  and  having  convened  this  our  holy 
and  Ecumenical  assembly,  has  united  the 
judgment  of  the  whole  Church.  Wherefore 
this  our  holy  and  Ecumenical  Synod  having 
driven  away  the  impious  error  which  had 
prevailed  for  a  certain  time  until  now,  and 
following  closely  the  straight  path  of  the 
holy  and  approved  Fathers,  has  piously 
given  its  full  assent  to  the  five  holy  and 
Ecumenical  Synods  (that  is  to  say,  to  that 
of  the  318  holy  Fathers  who  assembled  in 
Nice  against  the  raging  Arms ;  and  the 
next  in  Constantinople  of  the  150  God- 
inspired  men  against  Macedonius  the  ad- 
versary of  the  Spirit,  and  the  impious  Apol- 
linaris  ;  and  also  the  first  in  Ephesus  of  200 
venerable  men  convened  against  Nestorius 
the  Judaizer ;  and  that  in  Chalcedon  of 
630  God-inspired  Fathers  against  Eutyches 
and  Dioscorus  hated  of  God  ;  and  in  addi- 
tion to  these,  to  the  last,  that  is  the  Fifth 
holy  Synod  assembled  in  this  place,  against 
Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  Origen,  Didy- 
mus,  and  Evagrius,  and  the  writings  of 
Theodoret  against  the  Twelve  Chapters  of 
the  celebrated  Cyril,  and  the  Epistle  which 
was  said  to  be  written  by  Ibas  to  Maris  the 
Persian),  renewing  in  all  things  the  ancient 
decrees  of  religion,  and  chasing  away  the 
impious  doctrines  of  irreligion.     And  this 


our  holy  and  Ecumenical  Synod  inspired  of 
God  has  set  its  seal  to  the  Creed  which  was 
put  forth  by  the  318  Fathers,  and  again  re- 
ligiously confirmed  by  the  150,  Avhich  also 
the  other  holy  synods  cordially  received 
and  ratified  for  the  taking  away  of  every 
soul-destroying  heresy. 

The  Nicene  Creed  of  the  318  holy  Fa- 
thers. 

The  Creed 'of  the  150  holy  Fathers  as- 
sembled at  Constantinople. 

We  believe,  etc. 

The  holy  and  Ecumenical  Synod  further 
says,  this  pious  and  orthodox  Creed  of  the 
Divine  grace  would  be  sufficient  for  the  full 
knowledge  and  confirmation  of  the  ortho- 
dox faith.  But  as  the  author  of  evil,  who, 
in  the  beginning,  availed  himself  of  the  aid 
of  the  serpent,  and  by  it  brought  the  poison 
of  death  upon  the  human  race,  has  not 
desisted,  but  in  like  manner  now,  having 
found  suitable  instruments  for  working  out 
his  will  (we  mean  Theodoras,  who  was 
Bishop  of  Pharan,  Sergius,  Pyrrhus,  Paul 
and  Peter,  who  were  Archbishops  of  this 
royal  city,  and  moreover,  Honorius  who 
was  Pope  of  the  elder  Pome,  Cyrus  Bishop 
of  Alexandria,  Macarius  who  was  lately 
bishop  of  Antioch,  and  Stephen  his  disci- 
ple), has  actively  employed  them  in  raising 
up  for  the  whole  Church  the  stumbling- 
blocks  of  one  will  and  one  operation  in  the 
two  natures  of  Christ  our  true  God,  one  of 
the  Holy  Trinity;  thus  disseminating,  in 
novel  terms,  amongst  the  orthodox  people, 
an  heresy  similar  to  the  mad  and  wicked  doc- 
trine of  the  impious  Apollinaris,  Severus, 
and  Themistius,  and  endeavouring  craft- 
ily to  destroy  the  perfection  of  the  incar- 
nation of  the  same  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
our  God,  by  blasphemously  representing 
his  flesh  endowed  with  a  rational  soul  as 
devoid  of  will  or  operation.  Christ,  there- 
fore, our  God,  has  raised  up  our  faithful 
Sovereign,  a  new  David,  having  found  him 
a  man  after  his  own  heart,  who  as  it  is  writ- 
ten, "  has  not  suffered  his  eyes  to  sleep  nor 
his  eyelids  to  slumber,"  until  he  has  found 
a  perfect  declaration  of  orthodoxy  by  this 


III.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  G80-681 


345 


our  God-collected  and  holy  Synod ;  for,  ac- 
cording to  the  sentence  spoken  of  God, 
"  Where  two  or  three  are  gathered  together 
in  my  name,  there  am  I  in  the  midst  of 
them,"  the  present  holy  and  Ecumenical 
Synod  faithfully  receiving  and  saluting  Avith 
uplifted  hands  as  well  the  suggestion  which 
by  the  most  holy  and  blessed  Agatho,  Pope 
of  ancient  Rome,  was  sent  to  our  most  pious 
and  faithful  Emperor  Constantine,  which 
rejected  by  name  those  who  taught  or 
preached  one  will  and  one  operation  in  the 
dispensation  of  the  incarnation  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  who  is  our  very  God,  has 
likewise  adopted  that  other  synodal  sug- 
gestion which  was  sent  by  the  Council 
holclen  under  the  same  most  holy  Pope, 
composed  of  125  Bishops,  beloved  of  God, 
to  his  God-instructed  tranquillity,  as  conso- 
nant to  the  holy  Council  of  Chalcedon  and 
to  the  Tome  of  the  most  holy  and  blessed 
Leo,  Pope  of  the  same  old  Rome,  which  was 
directed  to  St.  Flavian,  which  also  this 
Council  called  the  Pillar  of  the  right  faith ; 
and  also  agrees  with  the  Synodal  Epistles 
which  were  written  by  Blessed  Cyril  against 
the  impious  Nestorius  and  addressed  to  the 
Oriental  Bishops.  Following  the  five  holy 
Ecumenical  Councils  and  the  holy  and  ap- 
proved Fathers,  with  one  voice  defining  that 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  must  be  confessed 
to  be  very  God  and  very  man,  one  of  the 
holy  and  consubstantial  and  life  -  giving 
Trinity,  perfect  in  Deity  and  perfect  in  hu- 
manity, very  God  and  very  man,  of  a  rea- 
sonable soul  and  human  body  subsisting ; 
consubstantial  with  the  Father  as  touching 
his  Godhead  and  consubstantial  with  us  as 
touching  his  manhood ;  in  all  things  like  unto 
us,  sin  only  excepted ;  begotten  of  his  Father 
before  all  ages  according  to  his  Godhead, 
but  in  these  last  days  for  us  men  and  for 
our  salvation  made  man  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
and  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  strictly  and  prop- 
erly the  Mother  of  God  according  to  the 
flesh;  one  and  the  same  Christ  our  Lord 
the  only-begotten  Son  of  two  natures  un- 
confusedly,  unchangeably,  inseparably,  in- 
divisibly  to  be  recognized,  the  peculiarities 
of  neither  nature  being  lost  by  the  union 
but  rather  the  proprieties  of  each  nature 
being  preserved,  concurring  in  one  Person 
and  in  one  subsistence,  not  parted  or  di- 
vided into  two  persons  but  one  and  the 
same  only-begotten  Son  of  God,  the  Word, 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  according  as  the 


Prophets  of  old  have  taught  us  and  as  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  himself  hath  instructed 
us,  and  the  Creed  of  the  holy  Fathers  hath 
delivered  to  us ;  defining  all  this  we  like- 
wise declare  that  in  him  are  two  natural 
wills  and  two  natural  operations  indivisibly, 
inconvertibly,  inseparably,  inconfusedly,  ac- 
cording to  the  teaching  of  the  holy  Fathers. 
And  these  two  natural  wills  are  not  contrary 
the  one  to  the  other  (God  forbid !)  as  the 
impious  heretics  assert,  but  his  human  will 
follows  and  that  not  as  resisting  and  reluc- 
tant, but  rather  as  subject  to  his  divine  and 
omnipotent  will.  For  it  was  right  that  the 
flesh  should  be  moved  but  subject  to  the 
divine  will,  according  to  the  most  wise 
Athanasius.  For  as  his  flesh  is  called  and 
is  the  flesh  of  God  the  Word,  so  also  the 
natural  will  of  his  flesh  is  called  and  is  the 
proper  will  of  God  the  Word,  as  he  him- 
self says  :  "I  came  down  from  heaven,  not 
that  I  might  do  mine  own  will  but  the 
will  of  the  Father  which  sent  me  ! "  where 
he  calls  his  own  will  the  will  of  his  flesh, 
inasmuch  as  his  flesh  was  also  his  own.  For 
as  his  most  holy  and  immaculate  animated 
flesh  was  not  destroyed  because  it  was  dei- 
fied but  continued  in  its  own  state  and  nat- 
ure (opa>  Te  real  Xo7<w),  so  also  his  human  will, 
although  deified,  was  not  suppressed,  but 
was  rather  preserved  according  to  the  say- 
ing of  Gregory  Theologus  :  "  His  will  [i.e., 
the  Saviour's]  is  not  contrary  to  God  but 
altogether  deified." 

We  glorify  two  natural  operations  indi- 
visibly, immutably,  inconfusedly,  insepara- 
bly in  the  same  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  our 
true  God,  that  is  to  say  a  divine  operation 
and  a  human  operation,  according  to  the 
divine  preacher  Leo,  who  most  distinctly 
asserts  as  follows  :  "  For  each  form  (iiopfyrj) 
does  in  communion  with  the  other  what  per- 
tains properly  to  it,  the  Word,  namely,  do- 
ing that  which  pertains  to  the  Word,  and 
the  flesh  that  which  pertains  to  the  flesh." 

For  we  will  not  admit  one  natural  opera- 
tion in  God  and  in  the  creature,  as  we  will 
not  exalt  into  the  divine  essence  what  is 
created,  nor  will  we  bring  down  the  glory 
of  the  divine  nature  to  the  place  suited  to 
the  creature. 

We  recognize  the  miracles  and  the  suffer- 
ings as  of  one  and  the  same  [Person],  but 
of  one  or  of  the  other  nature  of  which  he  is 
and  in  which  he  exists,  as  Cyril  admirably 
says.   Preserving  therefore  the  inconfused- 


346 


III.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  680-081 


ness  and  indivisibility,  we  make  briefly  this 
whole  confession,  believing  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  to  be  one  of  the  Trinity  and  after 
the  incarnation  our  true  God,  we  say  that 
his  two  natures  shone  forth  in  his  one  sub- 
sistence in  which  he  both  performed  the 
miracles  and  endured  the  sufferings  through 
the  whole  of  his  economic  conversation  (81 
0A/J75  avrov  t»}9  oiKovofiKrj'i  ava<TTpo<f>r}<;),  and 
that  not  in  appearance  only  but  in  very 
deed,  and  this  by  reason  of  the  difference 
of  nature  which  must  be  recognized  in  the 
same  Person,  for  although  joined  together 
yet  each  nature  wills  and  does  the  things 
proper  to  it  and  that  indivisibly  and  incon- 
fusedly.  Wherefore  we  confess  two  wills 
and  two  operations,  concurring  most  fitly  in 
him  for  the  salvation  of  the  human  race. 


These  things,  therefore,  with  all  diligence 
and  care  having  been  formulated  by  us,  we 
define  that  it  be  permitted  to  no  one  to  bring 
forward,  or  to  write,  or  to  compose,  or  to 
think,  or  to  teach  a  different  faith.  Whoso- 
ever shall  presume  to  compose  a  different 
faith,  or  to  propose,  or  teach,  or  hand  to 
those  wishing  to  be  converted  to  the  knowl- 
edge of  the  truth,  from  the  Gentiles  or  Jews, 
or  from  any  heresy,  any  different  Creed  ;  or 
to  introduce  a  new  voice  or  invention  of 
speech  to  subvert  these  things  which  now 
have  been  determined  by  us,  all  these,  if 
they  be  Bishops  or  clerics  let  them  be  de- 
posed, the  Bishops  from  the  Episcopate, 
the  clerics  from  the  clergy  ;  but  if  they  be 
monks  or  laymen :  let  them  be  anathema- 
tized. 


THE  PROSPHONETICUS  TO  THE  EMPEROR. 


(Labbe  and  Cossarfc,  Concilia,  Tom.  VI.,  col.  1047  et  seqq.) 


{This  address  begins  with  many  compli- 
ments to  the  Emperor,  especially  for  his  zeal 
for  the  true  faith.'] 

But  because  the  adversary  Satan  allows 
no  rest,  he  has  raised  up  the  very  ministers 
of  Christ  against  him,  as  if  armed  and  carry- 
ing weapons,  etc. 

[The  various  heretics  are  then  named  and 
how  they  \oere  condemned  by  the  preceding 
five  councils  is  set  forth.'] 

Things  being  so,  it  was  necessary  that 
your  beloved  of  Christ  majesty  should  gath- 
er together  this  all  holy,  and  numerous  as- 
sembly. 

Thereafter  beiug  inspired  by  the  Holy 
Ghost,  and  all  agreeing  and  consenting  to- 
gether, and  giving  our  approval  to  the  doc- 
trinal letter  of  our  most  blessed  and  exalted 
pope,  Agatho,  which  he  sent  to  your  mighti- 
ness, as  also  agreeing  to  the  suggestion  of 
the  holy  synod  of  one  hundred  and  twenty- 
five  fathers  held  under  him,  we  teach  that 
one  of  the  Holy  Trinity,  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  was  incarnate,  and  must  be  cele- 
brated in  two  perfect  natures  without  divis- 
ion and  without  confusion.  For  as  the 
Word,  he  is  consubstantial  and  eternal  with 
God  his  father ;  but  as  taking  flesh  of  the 
immaculate  Virgin  Mary,  the  Mother  of  God, 
he  is  perfect  man,  consubstantial  with  us 
and  made  in  time.  We  declare  therefore 
that  he  is  perfect  in  Godhead  and  that  the 
same  is  perfect  likewise  in  manhood,  ac- 
cording to  the  pristine  tradition  of  the 
fathers  and  the  divine  definition  of  Chalce- 
don. 

And  as  we  recognize  two  natures,  so  also 
we  recognize  two  natural  wills  and  two 
natural  operations.  For  we  dare  not  say 
that  either  of  the  natures  which  are  in  Christ 
in  his  incarnation  is  without  a  will  and 
operation :  lest  in  taking  away  the  pro- 
prieties of  those  natures,  we  likewise  take 
away  the  natures  of  which  they  are  the 
proprieties.  For  we  neither  deny  the 
natural  will  of  his  humanity,  or  its  natural 


operation :  lest  Ave  also  deny  what  is  the 
chief  thing  of  the  dispensation  for  our  sal- 
vation, and  lest  we  attribute  passions  to  the 
Godhead.  For  this  they  were  attempting 
who  have  recently  introduced  the  detestable 
novelty  that  in  him  there  is  but  one  will 
and  one  operation,  renewing  the  malignancy 
of  Arius,  Apollinaris,  Eutyches  and  Severus. 
For  should  we  say  that  the  human  nature 
of  our  Lord  is  without  will  and  operation, 
how  could  we  affirm  in  safety  the  perfect 
humanity?  For  nothing  else  constitutes 
the  integrity  of  human  nature  except  the 
essential  will,  through  which  the  strength 
of  free-will  is  marked  in  us ;  and  this  is 
also  the  case  with  the  substantial  operation. 
For  how  shall  we  call  him  perfect  in  hu- 
manity if  he  in  no  wise  suffered  and  acted 
as  a  man  ?  For  like  as  the  union  of  two 
natures  preserves  for  us  one  subsistence 
without  confusion  and  without  division ;  so 
this  one  subsistence,  shewing  itself  in  two 
natures,  demonstrates  as  its  own  what 
things  belong  to  each. 

Therefore  we  declare  that  in  him  there 
are  two  natural  wills  and  two  natural  opera- 
tions, proceeding  commonly  and  without 
division :  but  we  cast  out  of  the  Church  and 
rightly  subject  to  anathema  all  superfluous 
novelties  as  well  as  their  inventors  :  to  wit, 
Theodore  of  Pharan,  Sergius  and  Paul,  Pyr- 
rhus,  and  Peter  (who  were  archbishops  of 
Constantinople),  moreover  Cyrus,  who  bore 
the  priesthood  of  Alexandria,  and  with 
them  Honorius,  who  was  the  ruler  (irpoehpov) 
of  Rome,  as  he  followed  them  in  these 
things.  Besides  these,  with  the  best  of 
cause  we  anathematize  and  depose  Maca- 
rius,  who  was  bishop  of  Antioch,  and  his 
disciple  Stephen  (or  rather  we  should  say 
master),  who  tried  to  defend  the  impiety  of 
their  predecessors,  and  in  short  stirred  up 
the  whole  world,  and  by  their  pestilential 
letters  and  by  their  fraudulent  institutions 
devastated  multitudes  in  every  direction. 
Likewise  also  that  old  man  Polychronius, 
with  an  infantile  intelligence,  who  promised 
he  would  raise  the  dead  and  who  when  they 
did  not  rise,  was  laughed  at ;  and  all  who 
have  taught,  or  do  teach,  or  shall  presume 


348 


III.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  680-681 


to  teacli  one  will  and  one  operation  in  the 
incarnate  Christ.  .  .  .  But  the  highest 
prince  of  the  Apostles  fought  with  us :  for 
we  had  on  our  side  his  imitator  and  the 
successor  in  his  see,  who  also  had  set  forth 
in  his  letter  the  mystery  of  the  divine 
word  (SeoXoybas).  For  the  ancient  city  of 
Home  handed  thee  a  confession  of  divine 
character,  and  a  chart  from  the  sunsetting 
raised  up  the  day  of  dogmas,  and  made  the 
darkness  manifest,  and  Peter  spoke  through 
Agatho,  and  thou,  O  autocratic  King,  ac- 
cording to  the  divine  decree,  with  the  Om- 
nipotent Sharer  of  thy  throne,  didst  judge. 


But,  O  benign  and  justice-loving  Lord, 


do  thou  in  return  do  this  favour  to  him  who 
hath  bestowed  thy  power  upon  thee ;  and 
give,  as  a  seal  to  what  has  been  defined  by  us, 
thy  imperial  ratification  in  writing,  and  so 
confirm  them  with  the  customary  pious 
edicts  and  constitutions,  that  no  one  may 
contradict  the  things  which  have  been  done, 
nor  raise  any  fresh  question.  For  rest 
assured,  O  serene  majesty,  that  we  have  not 
falsified  anything  defined  by  the  Ecumeni- 
cal Councils  and  by  the  approved  fathers, 
but  we  have  confirmed  them.  And  now  we 
all  cry  out  with  one  mind  and  one  voice, 
"  O  God,  save  the  King !  etc.,  etc." 

[Then  follow  numerous  compliments  to  the 
Emperor  and  prayers  for  his  preservation.} 


LETTEE  OF  THE  COUNCIL  TO  ST.  AGATHO. 


{Found  in  Migne,  Pat.  Lat.,  Tom.  LXXXVIL,  col.  18J+7  et  seqq. ;  and  Labbe  and  Cossart, 

Concilia,  Tom.  VI.,  col.  1071  et  seqq.) 


A  copy  of  the  letter  sent  by  the  holy  and 
Ecumenical  Sixth  Council  to  Agatho,  the 
most  blessed  and  most  holy  pope  of  Old 
Home. 

'  The  holy  and  ecumenical  council  which 
by  the  grace  of  God  and  the  pious  sanction 
of  the  most  pious  and  faithful  Constantine, 
the  great  Emperor,  has  been  gathered  to- 
gether in  this  God-preserved  and  royal  city, 
Constantinople,  the  new  Rome,  in  the 
Secretum  of  the  imperial  (deiov,  sacri) 
palace  called  Trullus,  to  the  most  holy  and 
most  blessed  pope  of  Old  Rome,  Agatho, 
health  in  the  Lord. 

Serious  illnesses  call  for  greater  helps, 
as  you  know,  most  blessed  [father] ;  and 
therefore  Christ  our  true  God,  who  is  the 
creator  and  governing  power  of  all  things, 
gave  a  wise  physician,  namely  your  God- 
honoured  sanctity,  to  drive  away  by  force 
the  contagion  of  heretical  pestilence  by  the 
remedies  of  orthodoxy,  and  to  give  the 
strength  of  health  to  the  members  of  the 
church.  Therefore  to  thee,  as  to  the  bish- 
op of  the  first  see  of  the  Universal  Church, 
we  leave  what  must  be  done,  since  you  wil- 
lingly take  for  your  standing  ground  the 
firm  rock  of  the  faith,  as  we  know  from 
having  read  your  true  confession  in  the 
letter  sent  by  your  fatherly  beatitude  to 
the  most  pious  emperor  :  and  we  acknowl- 
edge that  this  letter  Avas  divinely  written 
(perscriptas)  as  by  the  Chief  of  the  Apos- 
tles, and  through  it  we  have  cast  out  the 
heretical  sect  of  many  errors  which  had  re- 
cently sprung  up,  having  been  urged  to 
making  a  decree  by  Constantine  who  di- 
vinely reigns,  and  wields  a  most  clement 
sceptre.  And  by  his  help  we  have  over- 
thrown the  error  of  impiety,  having  as  it 
were  laid  siege  to  the  nefarious  doctrine  of 
the  heretics.  And  then  tearing  to  pieces 
the  foundations  of  their  execrable  heresy, 
and  attacking  them  with  spiritual  and  pa- 
ternal arms,  and  confounding  their  tongues 
that  they  might  not  speak  consistently  with 
each  other,  we  overturned  the  tower  built 
up  by  these  followers  of  this  most  impious 


heresy  ;  and  we  slew  them  with  anathema, 
as  lapsed  concerning  the  faith  and  as  sin- 
ners, in  the  morning  outside  the  camp  of 
the  tabernacle  of  God,  that  we  may  express 
ourselves  after  the  manner  of  David,1  in 
accordance  with  the  sentence  already  given 
concerning  them  in  your  letter,  and  their 
names  are  these :  Theodore,  bishop  of 
Pharan,  Sergius,  Honorius,  Cyrus,  Paul, 
Pyrrhus  and  Peter.  Moreover,  in  addition 
to  these,  we  justly  subjected  to  the  anath- 
ema of  heretics  those  also  who  live  in 
their  impiety  which  they  have  received,  or, 
to  speak  more  accurately,  in  the  impiety  of 
these  God  -  hated  persons,  Apollinaris, 
Severus  and  Themestius,  to  wit,  Macarius, 
who  was  the  bishop  of  the  great  city  of 
Antioch  (and  him  we  also  stripped  deserv- 
edly of  his  pastor's  robes  on  account  of 
his  impenitence  concerning  the  orthodox 
faith  and  his  obstinate  stubbornness),  and 
Stephen,  his  disciple  in  craziness  and  his 
teacher  in  impiety,  also  Polychronius,  who 
was  inveterate  in  his  heretical  doctrines, 
thus  answering  to  his  name  ;  and  finally  all 
those  who  impenitently  have  taught  or  do 
teach,  or  now  hold  or  have  held  similar 
doctrines. 

Up  to  now  grief,  sorrow,  and  many 
tears  have  been  our  portion.  For  we  can- 
not laugh  at  the  fall  of  our  neighbours,  nor 
exult  with  joy  at  their  unbridled  madness, 
nor  have  we  been  elated  that  we  might  fall 
all  the  more  grievously  because  of  this 
thing  ;  not  thus,  O  venerable  and  sacred 
head,  have  we  been  taught,  we  who  hold 
Christ,  the  Lord  of  the  universe,  to  be 
both  benign  and  man-loving  in  the  highest 
degree  ;  for  he  exhorts  us  to  be  imitators 
of  him  in  his  priesthood  so  far  as  is  possi- 
ble, as  becometh  the  good,  and  to  obtain 
the  pattern  of  his  pastoral  and  concilia- 
tory government.  But  also  to  true  repent- 
ance the  most  Serene  Emperor  and  our- 
selves have  exhorted  them  in  various  ways, 
and  we  have  conducted  the  whole  matter 
with   great   religiousness   and  care.     Nor 

1  Psalm  C,  verse  8  (Heb.  ci.,  ult.)  neither  LXX.  nor  Vulgate 
version. 


350 


III.  CONSTANTINOPLE.    A.D.  680-681 


have  we  been  moved  to  do  so  for  the  sake 
of  gain,  nor  by  hatred,  as  yon  can  easily 
see  from  what  things  have  been  done  in 
each  session,  and  related  in  the  minutes, 
which  are  herewith  sent  to  your  blessed- 
ness :  and  you  will  understand  from  your 
holiness's  vicars,  Theodore  and  George,  pres- 
byters beloved  of  God,  and  from  John,  the 
most  religious  deacon,  and  from  Constan- 
tine,  the  most  venerable  sub-deacon,  all  of 
them  your  spiritual  children  and  our  well- 
loved  brethren.  So  too  you  will  hear  the 
same  things  from  those  sent  by  your  holy 
synod,  the  holy  bishops  who  rightly  and 
uprightly,  in  accordance  with  your  disci- 
pline, decreed  with  us  in  the  first  chapter  of 
the  faith. 

Thus,  illuminated  by  the  Holy  Spirit, 
and  instructed  by  your  doctrine,  we  have 
cast  forth  the  vile  doctrines  of  impiety, 
making  smooth  the  right  path  of  orthodoxy, 
being  in  every  way  encouraged  and  helped 
in  so  doing  by  the  wisdom  and  power  of 
our  most  pious  and  serene  Emperor  Con- 
stantine.  And  then  one  of  our  number, 
the  most  holy  prsesul  of  this  reigning  Con- 
stantinople, in  the  first  place  assenting 
to  the  orthodox  compositions  sent  by  you 
to  the  most  pious  emperor  as  in  all  re- 
spects agreeable  to  the  teaching  of  the 
approved  Fathers  and  of  the  God-instruct- 
ed Fathers,  and  of  the  holy  five  universal 
councils,  we  all,  by  the  help  of  Christ 
our  God,  easily  accomplished  what  we 
were  striving  after.  For  as  God  was  the 
mover,  so  God  also  he  crowned  our  coun- 
cil. 

Thereupon,  therefore,  the  grace  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  shone  upon  us,  displaying  his 
power,  through  your  assiduous  prayers,  for 
the  uprooting  of  all  weeds  and  every  tree 
which  brought  not  forth  good  fruit,  and  giv- 
ing command  that  they  should  be  consumed 
by  fire.  And  we  all  agree  both  in  heart  and 
tongue,  and  hand,  and  have  put  forth,  by 
the  assistance  of  the  life-giving  Spirit,  a 


definition,  clean  from  all  error,  certain,  and 
infallible  ;  not  '  removing  the  ancient  land- 
marks, as  it  is  written  (God  forbid !),  but 
remaining  steadfast  in  the  testimonies  and 
authority  of  the  holy  and  approved  fathers, 
and  denning  that,  as  of  two  and  in  two 
natures  (to  wit,  the  divinity  and  the  hu- 
manity) of  which  he  is  composed  and  in 
which  he  exists,  Christ  our  true  God  is 
preached  by  us,  and  is  glorified  inseparably, 
unchangeably,  unconfusedly,  and  undivid- 
edly ;  just  so  also  we  predicate  of  him 
two  natural  operations,  undividedly,  incon- 
trovertibly,  unconfusedly,  inseparably,  as 
has  been  declared  in  our  synodal  defini- 
tion. These  decrees  the  majesty  of  our 
God-copying  Emperor  assented  to,  and  sub- 
scribed them  with  his  own  hand.  And,  as 
has  been  said,  we  rejected  and  condemned 
that  most  impious  and  lansubstantial  heresy 
which  affirmed  but  one  will  and  one  oper- 
ation in  the  incarnate  Christ  our  true  God, 
and  by  so  doing  we  have  pressed  sore  upon 
the  crowd  who  confound  and  who  divide, 
and  have  extinguished  the  inflamed  storm 
of  other  heresies,  but  Ave  have  set  forth 
clearly  with  you  the  shining  light  of  the 
orthodox  faith,  and  we  pray  your  paternal 
sanctity  to  confirm  our  decree  by  your 
honourable  rescript ;  through  which  we 
confide  in  good  hope  in  Christ  that  his 
merciful  kindness  will  grant  freely  to  the 
Eoman  State,  committed  to  the  care  of  our 
most  clement  Emperor,  stability ;  and  will 
adorn  with  daily  yokes  and  victories  his 
most  serene  clemency  ;  and  that  in  addition 
to  the  good  things  he  has  here  bestowed 
upon  us,  he  will  set  your  God-honoured 
holiness  before  his  tremendous  tribunal  as 
one  who  has  sincerely  confessed  the  true 
faith,  preserving  it  unsullied  and  keeping 
good  ward  over  the  orthodox  flocks  com- 
mitted to  him  by  God. 

We  and  all  who  are  with  us  salute  all 
the  brethren  in  Christ  who  are  with  your 
blessedness. 


III.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  680-681  351 

EXCURSUS  ON  THE  CONDEMNATION  OF  POPE  HONORIUS. 

To  this  decree  attaches  not  only  the  necessary  importance  and  interest  which  belongs  to 
any  ecumenical  decision  upon  a  disputed  doctrinal  question  with  regard  to  the  incarnation 
of  the  Son  of  God,  but  an  altogether  accidental  interest,  arising  from  the  fact  that  by  this 
decree  a  Pope  of  Rome  is  stricken  with  anathema  in  the  person  of  Honorius.  I  need  hardly 
remind  the  reader  how  many  interesting  and  difficult  questions  in  theology  such  an  action 
on  the  part  of  an  Ecumenical  Council  raises,  and  how  all  important,  not  to  say  vital,  to  such 
as  accept  the  ruling  of  the  recent  Vatican  Council,  it  is  that  some  explanation  of  this  fact 
should  be  arrived  at  which  will  be  satisfactory.  It  would  be  highly  improper  for  me  in  these 
pages  to  discuss  the  matter  theologically.  Volumes  on  each  side  have  been  written  on  this 
subject,  and  to  these  I  must  refer  the  reader,  but  in  doing  so  I  hope  I  may  be  pardoned  if  I 
add  a  word  of  counsel — to  read  both  sides.  If  one's  knowledge  is  derived  only  from  modern 
Eastern,  Anglican,  or  Protestant  writers,  such  as  "  Janus  and  the  Council,"  the  Pere  Gra try's 
"  Letters,"  or  Littledale's  controversial  books  against  Rome,  one  is  apt  to  be  as  much  one- 
sided as  if  he  took  his  information  from  Cardinal  Baronius,  Cardinal  Bellarmine,  Rohr- 
bacher's  History,  or  from  the  recent  work  on  the  subject  by  Pennacchi.1  Perhaps  the  aver- 
age reader  will  hardly  find  a  more  satisfactory  treatment  than  that  by  Bossuet  in  the 
Defensio.     (Liber  VII.,  cap.  xxi.,  etc.) 

It  will  be  sufficient  for  the  purposes  of  this  volume  to  state  that  Roman  Catholic  Curi- 
alist  writers  are  not  at  one  as  to  how  the  matter  is  to  be  treated.  Pennacchi,  in  his  work 
referred  to  above,  is  of  opinion  that  Honorius's  letters  were  strictly  speaking  Papal  decrees, 
set  forth  auctoritate  apostolka,  and  therefore  irreformable,  but  he  declares,  contrary  to  the 
opinion  of  almost  all  theologians  and  to  the  decree  of  this  Council,  that  they  are  orthodox, 
and  that  the  Council  erred  in  condemning  them  ;  as  he  expresses  it,  the  decree  rests  upon 
an  error  in  facto  dogmatico.  To  save  an  Ecumenical  Synod  from  error,  he  thinks  the  synod 
ceased  to  be  ecumenical  before  it  took  this  action,  and  was  at  that  time  only  a  synod  of  a 
number  of  Orientals !  Cardinal  Baronius  has  another  way  out  of  the  difficulty.  He  says 
that  the  name  of  Honorius  was  forged  and  put  in  the  decree  by  an  erasure  in  the  place  of 
the  name  of  Theodore,  the  quondam  Patriarch,  who  soon  after  the  Council  got  himself  re- 
stored to  the  Patriarchal  position.  Baronius  moreover  holds  that  Honorius's  letters  have 
been  corrupted,  that  the  Acts  of  the  Council  have  been  corrupted,  and,  in  short,  that  every- 
thing which  declares  or  proves  that  Honorius  was  a  heretic  or  was  condemned  by  an  Ecu- 
menical Council  as  such,  is  untrustworthy  and  false.  The  groundlessness,  not  to  say 
absurdity,  of  Baronius's  view  has  been  often  exposed  by  those  of  his  own  communion,  a  brief 
but  sufficient  summary  of  the  refutation  will  be  found  in  Hefele,  who  while  taking  a  very 
halting  and  unsatisfactory  position  himself,  yet  is  perfectly  clear  that  Baronius's  contention 
is  utterly  indefensible.2 

Most  Roman  controversialists  of  recent  years  have  admitted  both  the  fact  of  Pope  Ho- 
norius's condemnation  (which  Baronius  denies),  and  the  monothelite  (and  therefore  heretical) 
character  of  his  epistles,  but  they  are  of  opinion  that  these  letters  were  not  his  ex  cathedrd 
utterances  as  Doctor  Universalis,  but  mere  expressions  of  the  private  opinion  of  the  Pontiff 
as  a  theologian.     With  this  matter  we  have  no  concern  in  this  connexion. 

I  shall  therefore  say  nothing  further  on  this  point  but  shall  simply  supply  the  leading 
proofs  that  Honorius  was  as  a  matter  of  fact  condemned  by  the  Sixth  Ecumenical  Council. 

1.  His  condemnation  is  found  in  the  Acts  in  the  xiiith  Session,  near  the  beginning. 

2.  His  two  letters  were  ordered  to  be  burned  at  the  same  session. 

1  Pennacchi.    De  Bbnorii  I.,  Romani  Pontificis,  causa  in  ConcUio  VI. 

2  Hefele.    Bistory  of  tltt  Councils.    Vol.  Y.,p.  190  eS  seqq. 


352  III.  CONSTANTINOPLE.     A.D.  680-681 

3.  In  the  xvith  Session  the  bishops  exclaimed  "  Anathema  to  the  heretic  Sergius,  to  the 
heretic  Cyrus,  to  the  heretic  Honorius,  etc." 

4.  In  the  decree  of  faith  published  at  the  xviijth  Session  it  is  stated  that  "  the  originator 
of  all  evil    .    .    .    found  a  fit  tool  for  his  will  in    .    .    .    Honorius,  Pope  of  Old  Rome,  etc." 

5.  The  report  of  the  Council  to  the  Emperor  says  that  "  Honorius,  formerly  bishop  of 
Rome  "  they  had  "  punished  with  exclusion  and  anathema  "  because  he  followed  the  mono- 
thelites. 

6.  In  its  letter  to  Pope  Agatho  the  Council  says  it  "  has  slain  with  anathema  Honorius." 

7.  The  imperial  decree  speaks  of  the  "  unholy  priests  who  infected  the  Church  and  falsely 
governed  "  and  mentions  among  them  "Honorius,  the  Pope  of  Old  Rome,  the  confirmer  of 
heresy  who  contradicted  himself."  The  Emperor  goes  on  to  anathematize  "  Honorius  who 
was  Pope  of  Old  Rome,  who  in  everything  agreed  with  them,  went  with  them,  and  strength- 
ened the  heresy." 

8.  Pope  Leo  II.  confirmed  the  decrees  of  the  Council  and  expressly  says  that  he  too 
anathematized  Honorius.1 

9.  That  Honorius  was  anathematized  by  the  Sixth  Council  is  mentioned  in  the  Trullan 
Canons  (No.  j.). 

10.  So  too  the  Seventh  Council  declares  its  adhesion  to  the  anathema  in  its  decree  of 
faith,  and  in  several  places  in  the  acts  the  same  is  said. 

11.  Honorius's  name  was  found  in  the  Roman  copy  of  the  Acts.  This  is  evident  from 
Anastasius's  life  of  Leo  II.     ( Vita  Leonis  II.) 

12.  The  Papal  Oath  as  found  in  the  Liber  Diurnus  2  taken  by  each  new  Pope  from  the 
fifth  to  the  eleventh  century,  in  the  form  probably  prescribed  by  Gregory  II.,  "  smites  with 
eternal  anathema  the  originators  of  the  new  heresy,  Sergius,  etc.,  together  with  Honorius, 
because  he  assisted  the  base  assertion  of  the  heretics." 

13.  In  the  lesson  for  the  feast  of  St.  Leo  II.  in  the  Roman  Breviary  the  name  of  Pope 
Honorius  occurs  among  those  excommunicated  by  the  Sixth  Synod.  Upon  this  we  may 
well  hear  Bossuet :  "  They  suppress  as  far  as  they  can,  the  Liber  Diurnus :  they  have  erased 
this  from  the  Roman  Breviary.  Have  they  therefore  hidden  it  ?  Truth  breaks  out  from  all 
sides,  and  these  things  become  so  much  the  more  evident,  as  they  are  the  more  studiously 
put  out  of  sight."  3 

With  such  an  array  of  proof  no  conservative  historian,  it  would  seem,  can  question  the 
fact  that  Honorius,  the  Pope  of  Rome,  was  condemned  and  anathematized  as  a  heretic  by 
the  Sixth  Ecumenical  Council. 

1  "  Also  Honorius,  qui  haiic  apostolicam  sedem  11011  apostolicae  [  2  Ed.  Eugene  de  Roziere.    Paris,  1869,  No.  84. 

traditionis  doctrina  lustravit,  sed  profana  proditione  immacula-  3  Bossuet.    Def.  Cleri  Gal.,  Lib.  vij.,  cap.  xsvj. 

tarn  fidem  subvertere  conatus  est,  et  omnes,  qui  in  sno  errore  de- 
f  uncti  sunt."  ' 


THE    IMPERIAL ,   EDICT   POSTED    IN    THE    THIRD    ATRIUM    OF    THE 
GREAT  CHURCH  NEAR  WHAT  IS  CALLED  DICYMBALA. 


In  the  name  of  our  Lord  and  Master 
Jesus  Christ,  our  God  and  Saviour,  the 
most  pious  Emperor,  the  peaceful  and 
Christ-loving  Constantine,  an  Emperor 
faithful  to  God  m  Jesus  Christ,  to  all  our 
Chnst-loyiug  people  living  in  this  God- 
preserved  and  royal  city. 

[The  document  is  very  long,  Hefele  gives 
the  following  epitome,  which  is  all  sufficient 
for  the  ordinary  reader,  toho  loill  remember 
that  it  is  an  Edict  of  the  Emperor  and  not 
anything  proceeding  from  the  council.-] 

Hefele's  Epitome  (Hist,  of  the  Council,    Vol 
v.,  p.  178). 

"The  heresy  of  Apollinaris,  etc.,  has  been 
renewed  by  Theodore  of  Pharan  and  con- 
firmed by  Honorms,  sometime  Pope  of  Old 
Kome,  who  also  contradicted  himself.  Also 
Cyrus,_  Pyrrhus  Paul,  Peter;  more  recently 
Macarms  Stephen,  and  Polychromus  had 
diffused  Monothehtism.     He,   the  Emperor 


had  therefore  convoked   this  holy  and  Ecu- 
menical  Synod,  and   published   the   present 
edict  with  the  confession  of  faith,  in  order  to 
confirm  and  establish  its  decrees.     (There  fol 
lows  here   an  extended   confession  of  faith 
with  proofs  for  the  doctrine  of  two  wills  and 
operations  )     As  he  recognized  the  five  earlier 
Ecumenical  Synods,  so  he  anathematized  all 
heretics  from   Simon  Magus,  but   especially 
the  originator  and  patrons  of  the  new  heresy, 
Theodore  and  Sergius  ;  also  Pope  Honorius 
who  was  their  adherent  and  patron  in  every- 
thing, and  confirmed  the  heresy  (rbv  Kara  Jv. 
to.  rovrois  trvvaipirrp,  kcl\  awSpofxov  Kal  fieBaimrrtv 
rys  atpe(rem)  further,  Cyrus,  etc,  and  ordained 
that  no  one  henceforth  should  hold  a  different 
taitn,  or  venture  to  teach  one  will  and  one  en- 
ergy     In  no  other  than  the  orthodox  faith 
could  men  be  saved.     Whoever  did  not  obey 
the  imperial  edict  should,  if  he  were  a  bishop 
or  cleric  be  deposed  ;  if  an  official,  punished 
with  confiscation  of  property  and  loss  of  the 
girdle \m>n)\   if  a  private  person,  banished 
irom  the  residence  and  all  other  cities  " 


VOL.    XIV, 


A  a 


THE   CANONS   OF  THE   COUNCIL   IN  TRULLO ; 

OFTEN  CALLED 

THE  QUINISEXT  COUNCIL, 

A.D.   G92. 


Introductory  Note. 

The  Canons  ivith  the  Ancient  Epitome  and 
Notes. 


Elenchus. 

Excursus  to  Canon   VI,  On  the  Marriage 
of  the  Clergy. 


a  a  3 


INTRODUCTORY   NOTE. 

From  the  fact  that  the  canons  of  the  Council  in  Trullo  are  included  in  this  volume  of 
the  Decrees  and  Canons  of  the  Seven  Ecumenical  Councils  it  must  not  for  an  instant  be 
supposed  that  it  is  intended  thereby  to  affirm  that  these  canons  have  any  ecumenical  au- 
thority, or  that  the  council  by  which  they  were  adopted  can  lay  any  claim  to  being  ecu- 
menical either  in  view  of  its  constitution  or  of  the  subsequent  treatment  by  the  Church  of 
its  enactments. 

It  is  true  that  it  claimed  at  the  time  an  ecumenical  character,  and  styled  itself  such  in 
several  of  its  canons,  it  is  true  that  in  the  mind  of  the  Emperor  Justinian  II. ,  who  sum- 
moned it,  it  was  intended  to  have  been  ecumenical.  It  is  true  that  the  Greeks  at  first  de- 
clared it  to  be  a  continuation  of  the  Sixth  Synod  and  that  b}-  this  name  they  frequently 
denominate  and  quote  its  canons.  But  it  is  also  true  that  the  West  was  not  really  rep- 
resented at  it  at  all  (as  we  shall  see  presently)  ;  that  when  the  Emperor  afterwards  sent  the 
canons  to  the  Pope  to  receive  his  signature,  he  absolutely  refused  to  have  anything  to  do 
with  them  ;  and  it  is  further  true  that  they  were  never  practically  observed  by  the  West  at 
all,  and  that  even  in  the  East  their  authority  was  rather  theoretical  than  real. 

(Fleury.     Histoire  Ecclesiastique,  Livre  XL.,  Chap,  xlix.) 

As  the  two  last  General  Councils  (in  553  and  in  G81)  had  not  made  any  Canons,  the 
Orientals  judged  it  suitable  to  supply  them  eleven  years  after  the  Sixth  Council,  that  is  to 
say,  the  year  692,  fifth  indiction.  For  that  purpose  the  Emperor  Justinian  convoked  a 
Council,  at  which  211  Bishops  attended,  of  whom  the  principal  were  the  four  Patriarchs, 
Paul  of  Constantinople,  Peter  of  Alexandria,  Anastasius  of  Jerusalem,  George  of  Antioch. 
Next  in  the  subscriptions  are  named  John  of  Justinianopolis,  Cyriacus  of  Cesarea  in  Cappa- 
docia,  Basil  of  Gortyna  in  Crete,  who  says  that  he  represents  the  whole  Council  of  the 
Roman  Church,  as  he  had  said  in  subscribing  the  Sixth  Council.  But  it  is  certain  otherwise 
that  in  this  latter  council  there  were  present  Legates  of  the  Holy  See.  This  council,  like 
the  Sixth,1  assembled  in  the  dome  of  the  palace  called  in  Latin  Trullus,  which  name  it  has 
kept.  It  is  also  named  in  Latin  Quinisextum,  in  Greek  Penthecton,  as  one  might  say,  the 
fifth-sixth,  to  mark  that  it  is  only  the  supplement  of  the  two  preceding  Councils,  though 
properly  it  is  a  distinct  one. 

The  intention  was  to  make  a  body  of  discipline  to  serve  thenceforth  for  the  whole  Church, 
and  it  was  distributed  into  102  Canons. 

To  this  statement  by  Fleury  some  additions  must  be  made.  First,  with  regard  to  the 
date  of  the  synod.  This  is  not  so  certain  as  would  appear  at  first  sight.  At  the  Seventh 
Ecumenical  Council,  the  patriarch  Tarasius  of  Constantinople  asserted  that,  "  four  or  five 
years  after  the  sixth  Ecumenical  Council  the  same  bishops,  in  a  new  assembly  under 
Justinian  II.  had  published  the  [Trullan]  Canons  mentioned,"  and  this  assertion  the  Seventh 
Council  appears  to  have  accepted  as  true,  if  we  understand  the  sixth  session  aright.  Now 
were  this  statement  true,  the  date  would  be  probably  686,  but  this  is  impossible  by  the 
words  of  the  council  itself,  where  we  find  mention  made  of  the  fifteenth  of  January  of  the 
past  4th  indiction,  or  the  year  of  the  world,  6109.  To  make  this  agree  at  all,  scholars  tell 
us  that  for  iv.  must  be  read  xiv.  But  the  rest  of  the  statement  is  equally  erroneous,  the 
bishops  were  not  the  same,  as  can  readily  be  seen  by  comparing  the  subscriptions  to  the  Acts. 

The  year  of  the  world  6109  is  certainly  wrong,  and  so  other  scholars  would  read  6199, 

1  This  statement  of  Fieurv's  is  contested  by  those  who  agree  with  Asseiaan  in  thinking  that  the  Sixth  Synod  was  held  in  Santa 
Sophia,  vide  Biblioth,  Jar..  One-it.  Tom.  v.,  p.  85. 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692  357 


but  here  a  division  takes  place,  for  some  reckon  by  the  Constantinopolitan  era,  and  so  fix 
the  date  at  691,  and  others  following  the  Alexandrian  era  fix  it  at  706.  But  this  last  is  cer- 
tainly wrong,  for  the  canons  were  sent  for  signature  to  Pope  Sergius,  who  died  as  early  as 
701.     Hefele's  conclusion  is  as  follows  : 

(Hefele.     Hist,  of  the  Councils,  Vol.  V.,  p.  222.) 

The  year  6199  of  the  Constantinopolitan  era  coincides  with  the  year  691  after  Christ  and 
the  IVth  Indiction  ran  from  September  1,  690,  to  August  31,  691.  If  then,  our  Synod,  in 
canon  iij.,  speaks  of  the  15th  of  January  in  the  past  Indiction  IV.,  it  means  January  691 ;  but 
it  belongs  itself,  to  the  Vth  Indiction,  i.e.,  it  was  opened  after  September  1,  691,  and  before 
September  1,  692. 

As  this  is  not  a  history  of  the  Councils  but  a  collection  of  their  decrees  and  canons  with 
illustrative  notes,  the  only  other  point  to  be  considered  is  the  reception  these  canons  met  with. 

The  decrees  were  signed  first  by  the  Emperor,  the  next  place  was  left  vacant  for  the  Pope, 
then  followed  the  subscriptions  of  the  Patriarchs  of  Constantinople,  Alexandria,  Jerusalem, 
and  Antioch,  the  whole  number  being  211,  bishops  or  representatives  of  bishops.  It  is  not 
quite  certain  whether  any  of  the  Patriarchs  were  present  except  Paul  of  Constantinople  ;  but 
taking  it  all  in  all  the  probability  is  in  favour  of  their  presence.1  Blank  places  were  left  for 
the  bishops  of  Thessalonica,  Sardinia,  Ravenna  and  Corinth.  The  Archbishop  of  Gortyna  in 
Crete  added  to  his  signature  the  phrase  "  Holding  the  place  of  the  holy  Church  of  Rome 
in  every  synod."  He  had  in  the  same  way  signed  the  decrees  of  III.  Constantinople,  Crete  be- 
longing to  the  Roman  Patriarchate  ;  as  to  whether  his  delegation  on  the  part  of  the  Roman 
Synod  continued  or  was  merely  made  to  continue  by  his  own  volition  we  have  no  informa- 
tion. The  ridiculous  blunder  of  Balsamon  must  be  noted  here,  who  asserts  that  the  bishops 
whose  names  are  missing  and  for  which  blank  places  were  left,  had  actually  signed. 

Pope  Sergius  refused  to  sign  the  decrees  when  they  were  sent  to  him,  rejected  them  as 
"lacking  authority"  (invdlidi)  and  described  them  as  containing  "novel  errors."  With  the 
efforts  to  extort  his  signature  we  have  no  concern  further  than  to  state  that  they  signally 
failed.  Later  on,  in  the  time  of  Pope  Constantine,  a  middle  course  seems  to  have  been 
adopted,  a  course  subsequently  in  the  ninth  century  thus  expressed  by  Pope  John  VIII.,  "  he 
accepted  all  those  canons  which  did  not  contradict  the  true  faith,  good  morals,  and  the  de- 
crees of  Rome,"  a  truly  notable  statement !  Nearly  a  century  later  Pope  Hadrian  I.  dis- 
tinctly recognizes  all  the  Trullan  decrees  in  his  letter  to  Tenasius  of  Constantinople  and 
attributes  them  to  the  Sixth  Synod.  "All  the  holy  six  synods  I  receive  with  all  their  canons, 
which  rightly  and  divinely  were  promulgated  by  them,  among  which  is  contained  that  in 
which  reference  is  made  to  a  Lamb  being  pointed  to  by  the  Precursor  as  being  found  in  cer- 
tain of  the  venerable  images."  Here  the  reference  is  unmistakably  to  the  Trullan  Canon 
LXXXII. 

Hefele's  summing  up  of  the  whole  matter  is  as  follows  : 

(Hefele,  Hist  of  the  Councils,  Vol.  V,  p.  242.) 

That  the  Seventh  Ecumenical  Council  at  Nice  ascribed  the  Trullan  canons  to  the  Sixth 
Ecumenical  Council,  and  spoke  of  them  entirely  in  the  Greek  spirit,  cannot  astonish  us, 
as  it  was  attended  almost  solely  by  Greeks.  They  specially  pronounced  the  recognition  of 
the  canons  in  question  in  their  own  first  canon  ;  but  their  own  canons  have  never  received 
the  ratification  of  the  Holy  See. 

1  Cf.  Hefele,  I.e.,  Vol.  V.,  237.  On  the  other  hand  vide  Assetnan  (I.e.  Tom.  V.,  pp.  30,  69),  Who  thinks  Alexandria  and  Jeru- 
salem were  vacant  at  the  time ! 


358  QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


Thus  far  Hefele,  but  it  seems  that  Gratian's  statement  on  the  subject  in  the  Dccretum 
should  not  be  omitted  here.     (Pars  I.,  Dist.  XVI.,  c.  v.) 

"  Canon  V.  The  Sixth  Synod  is  confirmed  by  the  authority  of  Hadrian. 

"  I  receive  the  Sixth  Synod  with  all  its  canons. 

"  Gratian.  There  is  a  doubt  whether  it  set  forth  canons  but  this  is  easily  removed  by  examin- 
ing the  fourth  session  of  the  Tilth  [Vlth  by  mistake,  vide  Roman  Correctors'  note]  Synod. 

"For  Peter  the  Bp.  of  Nicomedia  says  : 

"  C.  VI.  The  Sixth  Synod  wrote  canons. 

"I  have  a  book  containing  the  canons  of  the  holy  Sixth  Synod.  The  Patriarch  said: 
§  1.  Some  are  scandalized  through  their  ignorance  of  these  canons,  saying  :  Did  the  Sixth 
Synod  make  any  canons  ?  Let  them  know  then  that  the  Sixth  Holy  Synod  was  gathered 
together  under  Constantine  against  those  who  said  there  is  one  operation  and  one  will  in 
Christ,  in  which  the  holy  Fathers  anathematized  these  as  heretics  and  explain  ed  the  orthodox 
faith. 

"II.  Pars  §  2.  And  the  synod  was  dissolved  in  the  XlVth  year  of  Constantine.  After 
four  or  five  years  the  same  holy  Fathers  met  together  under  Justinian,  the  son  of  Constan- 
tine, and  promulgated  the  aforementioned  canons,  of  which  let  no  one  have  any  doubt.  For 
they  who  under  Constantine  were  in  synod,  these  same  bishops  under  Justinian  subscribed 
to  all  these  canons.  For  it  was  fitting  that  a  Universal  Synod  should  promulgate  ecclesias- 
tical canons.  Item :  §  3.  The  Holy  Sixth  Synod  after  it  promulgated  its  definition  against 
the  Monothelites,  the  emperor  Constantine  who  had  summoned  it,  dying  soon  after,  and 
Justinian  his  son  reigning  in  his  stead,  §  the  same  holy  synod  divinely  inspired  again  met 
at  Constantinople  four  or  five  years  afterwards,  and  promulgated  one  hundred  and  two  canons 
for  the  correction  of  the  Church. 

"  Gratian.  From  this  therefore  it  may  be  gathered  that  the  Sixth  Synod  was  twice  assembled  : 
the  first  time  under  Constantine  and  then  passed  no  canons;  the  second  time  under  Justinian  his 
Son,  and  promulgated  the  aforesaid  canons." 

Upon  this  passage  of  Gratian's  the  Roman  Correctors  have  a  long  and  interesting  note, 
with  quotations  from  Anastasius,  which  should  be  read  with  care  by  the  student  but  is  too 
long  to  cite  here. 

I  close  with  some  eminently  wise  remarks  by  Prof.  Michaud. 

(E.  Michaud,  Discussion  8Ur  les  Sept  Concilcs  fficumenupics,  p.  272.) 

Upon  the  canons  of  this  council  we  must  remark  : 

i.  That  save  its  acceptance  of  the  dogmatic  decisions  of  the  six  Ecumenical  Councils, 
Which  is  Contained  in  the  first  canon,  this  council  had  an  exclusively  disciplinary  character ; 
ttnd  consequently  if  it  should  be  admitted  by  the  particular  churches,  these  would  always 
remain,  on  account  of  their  autonomy,  judges  of  the  fitness  or  non-suitability  of  the  practical 
application  of  these  decisions. 

2.  That  the  Easterns  have  never  pretended  to  impose  this  code  upon  the  practice  of  the 
Western  Churches,  especially  as  they  themselves  do  not  practise  everywhere  the  hundred  and 
two  canons  mentioned.  All  they  wished  to  do  was  to  maintain  the  ancient  discipline  against 
the  abuses  and  evil  innovations  of  the  Roman  Church,  and  to  make  her  pause  upon  the  dan- 
gerous course  in  which  she  was  already  beginning  to  enter. 

3.  That  if  among  these  canons,  some  do  not  apply  to  the  actual  present  state  of  society, 
e.g.,  the  8th,  10th,  11th,  etc.;  if  others,  framed  in  a  spirit  of  transition  between  the  then  East- 
ern customs  and  those  of  Rome,  do  not  appear  as  logical  nor  as  wise  as  one  might  desire,  e.g., 
the  6th,  12th,  48th,  etc.,  nevertheless  on  the  other  hand,  many  of  them  are  marked  with  the 
most  profound  sagacity. 


THE  CANONS  OF  THE  COUNCIL  IN  TRULLO. 

(Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Torn.  VI.,  col.  1135  et  seqq.) 

CANON  I. 

That  order  is  best  of  all  -which  makes  every  word  and  act  begin  and  end  in  God. 
Wherefore  that  piety  may  be  clearly  set  forth  by  us  and  that  the  Church  of  which 
Christ  is  the  foundation  may  be  continually  increased  and  advanced,  and  that  it  may  be 
exalted  above  the  cedars  of  Lebanon ;  now  therefore  Ave,  by  divine  grace  at  the  begin- 
ning of  our  decrees,  define  that  the  faith  set  forth  by  the  God-chosen  Apostles  who 
themselves  had  both  seen  and  were  ministers  of  the  Word,  shall  be  preserved  without 
any  innovation,  unchanged  and  inviolate. 

Moreover  the  faith  of  the  three  hundred  and  eighteen  holy  and  blessed  fathers 
who  were  assembled  at  Nice  under  Constantine  our  Emperor,  against  the  impious  Arius, 
and  the  gentile  diversity  of  deity  or  rather  (to  speak  accurately)  multitude  of  gods 
taught  by  him,  who  by  the  unanimous  acknowledgment  of  the  faithful  revealed  and 
declared  to  us  the  consubstantiality  of  the  Three  Persons  comprehended  in  the  Di- 
vine Nature,  not  suffering  this  faith  to  lie  hidden  under  the  bushel  of  ignorance,  but 
openly  teaching  the  faithful  to  adore  with  one  worship  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the 
Holy  Ghost,  confuting  and  scattering  to  the  winds  the  opinion  of  different  grades,  and 
demolishing  and  overturning  the  puerile  toyings  fabricated  out  of  sand  by  the  heretics 
against  orthodoxy. 

Likewise  also  we  confirm  that  faith  which  was  set  forth  by  the  one  hundred  and 
fifty  fathers  who  in  the  time  of  Theodosius  the  Elder,  our  Emperor,  assembled  in  this 
imperial  city,  accepting  their  decisions  with  regard  to  the  Holy  Ghost  in  assertion  of 
his  godhead,  and  expelling  the  profane  Macedonius  (together  with  all  previous  enemies 
of  the  truth)  as  one  who  dared  to  judge  Him  to  be  a  servant  who  is  Lord,  and  who 
wished  to  divide,  like  a  robber,  the  inseparable  unity,  so  that  there  might  be  no  perfect 
mystery  of  oiir  faith. 

And  together  with  this  odious  and  detestable  contender  against  the  truth,  we  coii^- 
demn  Apollinaris,  priest  of  the  same  iniquity,  who  impiously  belched  forth  that  the 
Lord  assumed  a  body  unendowed  with  a  soul,1  thence  also  inferring  that  his  salvation 
wrought  for  us  was  imperfect. 

Moreover  what  things  were  set  forth  by  the  two  hundred  God-bearing  fathers  in  the 
city  of  Ephesus  in  the  days  of  Theodosius  our  Emperor,  the  son  of  Arcadius  ;  these  doc-^ 
trines  we  assent  to  as  the  unbroken  strength  of  piety,  teaching  that  Christ  the  incarnate 
Son  of  God  is  one ;  and  declaring  that  she  who  bare  him  without  human  seed  was  the 
immaculate  Ever- Virgin,  glorifying  her  as  literally  and  in  very  truth  the  Mother  of 
God.  We  condemn  as  foreign  to  the  divine  scheme  the  absurd  division  of  Nestorius, 
who  teaches  that  the  one  Christ  consists  of  a  man  separately  and  of  the  Godhead  sep- 
arately and  renews  the  Jewish  impiety. 

Moreover  we  confirm  that  faith  which  at  Chalcedon,  the  Metropolis,  was  set  forth 
in  accordance  with  orthodoxy  by  the  six  hundred  and  thirty  God-approved  fathers  in 
the  time  of  Marcian,  who  was  our  Emperor,  which  handed  down  with  a  great  and 
mighty  voice,  even  unto  the  ends  of  the  earth,  that  the  one  Christ,  the  son  of  God,  is  of 
two  natures,  and  must  be  glorified 2  in  these  two  natures,  and  which  cast  forth  from  the 
sacred  precincts  of  the  Church  as  a  black  pestilence  to  be  avoided,  Eutyches,  babbling 
stupidly  and  inanely,  and  teaching  that  the  great  mystery  of  the  incarnation  (ol/covcofiia<;) 
was  perfected  in  thought  only.  And  together  with  him  also  Nestorius  and  Dioscorus 
of  whom  the  former  was  the  defender  and  champion  of  the  division,  the  latter  of  the 
confusion  [of  the  two  natures  in  the  one  Christ],  both  of  whom  fell  away  from  the 
divergence  of  their  impiety  to  a  common  depth  of  perdition  and  denial  of  God. 

1  Latin  reads  "  mind  or  soul."  3  Latin,  "  believed  in," 


360 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.   692 


Also  we  recognize  as  inspired  by  the  Spirit  the  pious  voices  of  the  one  hundred  and 
sixty-five  God-bearing  fathers  who  assembled  in  this  imperial  city  in  the  time  of  our 
Emperor  Justinian  of  blessed  memory,  and  we  teach  them  to  those  who  come  after  us ; 
for  these  synodically  anathematized  and  execrated  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  (the  teacher 
of  Nestorius),  and  Origen,  and  Didymus,  and  Evagrius,  all  of  whom  reintroduced 
feigned  Greek  myths,  aud  brought  back  again  the  circlings  of  certain  bodies  and  souls, 
and  deranged  turnings  [or  transmigrations]  to  the  wanderings  or  dreamiugs  of  their 
minds,  and  impiously  insulting  the  resurrection  of  the  dead.  Moreover  [they  con- 
demned] what  things  were  written  by  Theodoret  against  the  right  faith  and  against  the 
Twelve  Chapters  of  blessed  Cyril,  and  that  letter  which  is  said  to  have  been  written 
by  Ibas. 

Also  we  agree  to  guard  untouched  the  faith  of  the  Sixth  Holy  Synod,  which  first 
assembled  in  this  imperial  city  in  the  time  of  Constantine,  our  Emperor,  of  blessed 
memory,  which  faith  received  still  greater  confirmation  from  the  fact  that  the  pious  Em- 
peror ratified  with  his  own  signet  that  which  was  written  for  the  security  of  future 
generations.  This  council  taught  that  we  should  openly  profess  our  faith  that  in  the 
incarnation  of  Jesus  Christ,  our  true  God,  there  are  two  natural  wills  or  volitions  and 
two  natural  operations  ;  and  condemned  by  a  just  sentence  those  who  adulterated  the 
true  doctrine  and  taught  the  people  that  in  the  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ  there  is  but  one 
will  and  one  operation ;  to  wit,  Theodore  of  Pharan,  Cyrus  of  Alexandria,  Honorius  of 
Rome,  Sergius,  Pyrrhus,  Paul  and  Peter,  who  were  bishops  of  this  God-preserved  city ; 
Macarius,  who  was  bishop  of  Antioch ;  Stephen,  who  was  his  disciple,  and  the  insane 
Polychronius,  depriving  them  henceforth  from  the  communion  of  the  body  of  Christ 
our  God. 

And,  to  say  so  once  for  all,  we  decree  that  the  faith  shall  stand  firm  and  remain  un- 
sullied tin  til  the  end  of  the  world  as  well  as  the  writings  divinely  handed  down  and  the 
teachings  of  all  those  who  have  beautified  and  adorned  the  Church  of  God  and  were 
lights  in  the  world,  having  embraced  the  word  of  life.  And  Ave  reject  and  anathematize 
those  whom  they  rejected  and  anathematized,  as  being  enemies  of  the  truth,  and  as  in- 
sane ragers  against  God,  and  as  lifters  up  of  iniquity. 

But  if  any  one  at  all  shall  not  observe  and  embrace  the  aforesaid  pious  decrees,  and 
teach  and  preach  in  accordance  therewith,  but  shall  attempt  to  set  himself  in  opposition 
thereto,  let  him  be  anathema,  according  to  the  decree  already  promulgated  by  the  ap- 
proved holy  and  blessed  Fathers,  and  let  him  be  cast  out  and  stricken  off  as  an  alien 
from  the  number  of  Christians.  For  our  decrees  add  nothing  to  the  things  previously 
defined,  nor  do  they  take  anything  away,  nor  have  we  any  such  power. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  I. 


No  innovation  upon  the  faith  of  the  Apostles  is 
to  be  allowed.  The  faith  of  the  Niccne  fathers  is 
perfect,  which  overthrows  through  the  homousion 
the  doctrines  of  Atius  ivho  introduced  degrees 
into  the  Godhead. 

The  Synod  held  under  Theodosius  the  great 
shall  be  held  inviolate,  which  deposed  Macedo- 
nius  who  asserted  that  the  Holy  Ghost  was  a 
servant. 

The  two  hundred  who  under  Theodosius  the 
Younger  assembled  at  Ephcsus  are  to  be  revered 
for  they  expelled  Nestorius  who  asserted  that  the 
Lord  was  man  and  God  separately  (iSikSs). 

Those  who  assembled  at  Chalcedon  in  the  time 


of  Mareion  are  to  be  celebrated  with  eternal 
remembrance,  icho  deposed  Eutychcs,  ivho  dared 
to  say  that  the  great  mystery  ivas  accomplished 
only  in  image,  as  well  as  Nestorius  and  Diosco- 
rus,  observing  equal  things  in  an  opposite  direc- 
tion. 

One  hundred  and  sixty-fire  were  assembled  in 
the  imperial  city  by  Justinian,  who  anathema- 
tised Origen,  for  teaching  periods  (irzpi6hov>)  of 
bodies  and  souls,  and  tlieodoret  ivho  dared  to 
set  himself  up  to  oppose  the  Twelve  Chapters  of 
Cyril. 

At  Constantinople  a  Synod  ivas  collected 
under  Constantine  which  rejected  Honorius  of 
Rome  and  Sergius,  prelate  of  Constantinople,  for 
teaching  one  will  and  one  operation. 


QTJINISEXT.     A.D.  G92 


361 


Aeistenus. 

The  fifth  was  held  in  the  time  of  Justinian 
the  Great  at  Constantinople  against  the  crazy 
(-apa^pov?)  Origen,  Evagrius  and  Didymus, 
•who  remodelled  the  Greek  figments,  and 
stupidly  said  that  the  same  bodies  they  had 
joined  with  them  would  not  rise  again ;  and 


that  Paradise  was  not  subject  to  the  appre- 
ciation of  the  sense,  and  that  it  was  not  from 
God,  and  that  Adam  was  not  formed  in  flesh, 
and  that  there  would  be  an  end  of  punish- 
ment, and  a  restitution  of  the  devils  to  their 
pristine  state,  and  other  innumerable  insane 
blasphemies. 


CANON  II. 

It  has  also  seemed  good  to  this  holy  Council,  that  the  eighty-five  canons,  received 
and  ratified  by  the  holy  and  blessed  Fathers  before  us,  and  also  handed  down  to.  uss  in 
the  name  of  the  holy  and  glorious  Apostles  should  from  this  time  forth  remain  firm  and 
unshaken  for  the  cure  of  souls  and  the  healing  of  disorders.  And  in  these  canons  we 
are  bidden  to  receive  the  Constitutions  of  the  Holy  Apostles  [written]  by  Clement.  But 
formerly  through  the  agency  of  those  who  erred  from  the  faith  certain  adulterous  mat- 
ter wras  introduced,  clean  contrary  to  piety,  for  the  polluting  of  the  Church,  which  ob- 
scures the  elegance  and  beauty  of  the  divine  decrees  in  their  present  form.  We  there- 
fore reject  these  Constitutions  so  as  the  better  to  make  sure  of  the  edification  and  security 
of  the  most  Christian  flock  ;  by  no  means  admitting  the  offspring  of  heretical  error,  and 
cleaving  to  the  pure  and  perfect  doctrine  of  the  Apostles.  But  we  set  our  seal  likewise 
upon  all  the  other  holy  canons  set  forth  by  our  holy  and  blessed  Fathers,  that  is,  by  the 
318  holy  God-bearing  Fathers  assembled  at  Nice,  and  those  at  Ancyra,  further  those  at 
Neocaesarea  and  likewise  those  at  Gangra,  and  besides,  those  at  Antioch  in  Syria :  those 
too  at  Laodicea  in  Phrygia  :  and  likewise  the  150  who  assembled  in  this  heaven-pro- 
tected royal  city  :  and  the  200  who  assembled  the  first  time  in  the  metropolis  of  the 
Ephesians,  and  the  630  holy  and  blessed  Fathers  at  Chalcedon.  In  like  manner  those 
of  Sardica,  and  those  of  Carthage  :  those  also  who  again  assembled  in  this  heaven-pro- 
tected royal  city  under  its  bishop  Nectarius  and  Theophilus  Archbishop  of  Alexandria. 
Likewise  too  the  Canons  [i.e.  the  decretal  letters]  of  Dionysius,  formerly  Archbishop 
of  the  great  city  of  Alexandria ;  and  of  Peter,  Archbishop  of  Alexandria  and  Martyr ; 
of  Gregory  the  Wonder-worker,  Bishop  of  Neocaesarea ;  of  Athanasius,  Archbishop  of 
Alexandria ;  of  Basil,  Archbishop  of  Cpesarea  in  Cappadocia ;  of  Gregory,  Bishop  of 
Nyssa ;  of  Gregory  Theologus ;  of  Amphilochius  of  Iconium  ;  of  Timothy,  Archbishop 
of  Alexandria;  of  Theophilus,  Archbishop  of  the  same  great  city  of  Alexandria;  of 
Cyril,  Archbishop  of  the  same  Alexandria  ;  of  Gennadius,  Patriarch  of  this  heaven-pro- 
tected royal  city.  Moreover  the  Canon  set  forth  by  Cyprian,  Archbishop  of  the  coun- 
try of  the  Africans  and  Martyr,  and  by  the  Synod  under  him,  which  has  been  kept  only 
in  the  country  of  the  aforesaid  Bishops,  according  to  the  custom  delivered  down  to  them. 
And  that  no  one  be  allowed  to  transgress  or  disregard  the  aforesaid  canons,  or  to  re- 
ceive others  beside  them,  supposititiously  set  forth  by  certain  who  have  attempted  to 
make  a  traffic  of  the  truth.  But  should  any  one  be  convicted  of  innovating  upon,  or 
attempting  to  overturn,  any  of  the  afore-mentioned  canons,  he  shall  be  subject  to  receive 
the  penalty  which  that  canon  imposes,  and  to  be  cured  by  it  of  his  transgression. 


NOTES 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  II. 
Wliatever  additions  have  been  made  through 


guile  by  the  heterodox  in  the  Apostolic  Constitu- 
tions edited  by  Clement,  shall  be  cut  out. 

This  canon  defines  what  canons  are  to  be 
understood  as  having  received  the  sanction  of 
ecumenical  authority,  and  since  these  canons 
of  the  Council  in  Trullo  were  received  at  the 


Seventh  Ecumenical  Council  in  its  first  canon 
as  the  canons  of  the  Sixth  Ecumenical  (of 
which  the  Quinisext  claimed  to  be  a  legitimate 
continuation)  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  all 
these  canons  enumerated  in  this  canon  are  set 
forth  for  the  guidance  of  the  Church. 

With  regard  to  what  councils  are  intended  : 
there  is  difficulty  only  in  two  particulars,  viz. , 
the  "  Council  of  Constantinople  under  Necta- 


362 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  G92 


rius  and  Theophilus,"  1  and  the  "  Council  un- 
der Cyprian  ;  "  the  former  must  be  the  Coun- 
cil of  394,  and  the  latter  is  usually  considered 
to  be  the  III.  Synod  of  Carthage,  a.d.  257. 


Fleuky. 

(H.  E.  Liv.  xl.,  chap,  xlix.) 

The  Council  of  Constantinople  under  Nec- 
tarius  and  Theophilus  of  Alexandria  must  be 
that  held  in  394,  at  the  dedication  of  Ruffi- 
nus's  Church  ;  but  we  have  not  its  canons. 
.  .  .  "  The  canon  published  by  St.  Cyprian 
for  the  African  Church  alone."  It  is  difficult 
to  understand  what  canon  is  referred  to  un- 
less it  is  the  preface  to  the  council  of  St.  Cyp- 
rian where  he  says  that  no  one  should  pre- 
tend to  be  bishop  of  bishops,  or  to  oblige  his 
colleagues  to  obey  him  by  tyrannical  fear. 


It  will  be  noticed  that  while  the  canon  is 
most  careful  to  mention  the  exact  number  of 
Apostolic  canons  it  received,  thus  deciding  in 
favour  of  the  larger  code,  it  is  equally  care- 
ful not  to  assign  them  an  Apostolic  origin, 
but  merely  to  say  that  they  had  come  down 
to  them  "  in  the  name  of"  the  Apostles.  In 
the  face  of  this  it  is  strange  to  find  Balsamon 
saying,  "  Through  this  canon  their  mouth  is 
stopped  who  say  that  85  canons  were  not 
set  forth  by  the  holy  Apostles ; "  what  the 
council  did  settle,  so  far  as  its  authority  went, 
was  the  number  not  the  authorship  of  the 
canons.  This,  I  think,  is  all  that  Balsamon 
intended  to  assert,  but  his  words  might  easily 
be  cpioted  as  having  a  different  meaning. 

This  canon  is  found,  in  part,  in  the  Corpus 
Juris  Canonici,  Gratian's  Dccrctum,  Pars  I., 
Dist.  XVI.,  c.  VII. 


CANON  III. 

Since  our  pious  and  Christian  Emperor  lias  addressed  this  holy  and  ecumenical 
council,  in  order  that  it  might  provide  for  the  purity  of  those  who  are  in  the  list  of  the 
clergy,  and  who  transmit  divine  things  to  others,  and  that  they  may  be  blameless  minis- 
trants,  and  worthy  of  the  sacrifice  of  the  great  God,  who  is  both  Offering  and  High 
Priest,  a  sacrifice  apprehended  by  the  intelligence :  and  that  it  might  cleanse  away  the 
pollutions  wherewith  these  have  been  branded  by  unlawful  marriages :  now  whereas 
they  of  the  most  holy  Roman  Church  purpose  to  keep  the  rule  of  exact  perfection,  but 
those  Avho  are  under  the  throne  of  this  heaven-protected  and  royal  city  keep  that  of 
kindness  and  consideration,  so  blending  both  together  as  our  fathers  have  done,  and  as 
the  love  of  God  requires,  that  neither  gentleness  fall  into  licence,  nor  severity  into 
harshness  ;  especially  as  the  fault  of  ignorance  has  reached  no  small  number  of  men,  we 
decree,  that  those  who  are  involved  in  a  second  marriage,  and  have  been  slaves  to  sin 
up  to  the  fifteenth  of  the  past  month  of  January,  in  the  past  fourth  Indiction,  the 
6109th  year,  and  have  not  resolved  to  repent  of  it,  be  subjected  to  canonical  deposition  : 
but  that  they  who  are  involved  in  this  disorder  of  a  second  marriage,  but  before  our 
decree  have  acknowledged  what  is  fitting,  and  have  cut  off  their  sin,  and  have  put  far 
from  them  this  strange  and  illegitimate  connexion,  or  they  whose  wives  by  second 
marriage  are  already  dead,  or  who  have  turned  to  repentance  of  their  own  accord,  hav- 
ing learnt  continence,  and  having  quickly  forgotten  their  former  iniquities,  whether 
they  be  presbyters  or  deacons,  these  we  have  determined  should  cease  from  all  priestly 
ministrations  or  exercise,  being  under  punishment  for  a  certain  time,  but  should  retain 
the  honour  of  their  seat  and  station,  being  satisfied  with  their  seat  before  the  laity  and 
begging  with  tears  from  the  Lord  that  the  transgression  of  their  ignorance  be  pardoned 
them  :  for  unfitting  it  were  that  he  should  bless  another  who  has  to  tend  his  own 
Avouuds.  But  those  who  have  been  married  to  one  wife,  if  she  was  a  widow,  and  like- 
wise those  Avho  after  their  ordination  have  unlawfully  entered  into  one  marriage  that  is, 
presbyters,  and  deacons,  and  subdeacons,  being  debarred  for  some  short  time  from 
sacred  ministration,  and  censured,  shall  be  restored  again  to  their  proper  rank,  never 
advancing  to  any  further  rank,  their  unlaAvful  marriage  being  openly  dissolved.  This 
Ave  decree  to  hold   good  only  in  the  case  of  those  that  are  involved  in  the  aforesaid 


•  The  Ultramontane  Roisselet  de  SancliOres,  in  his  Histoirc 
tftronologique  e.t  dogmatique  des  Concilcs  de  la  Chretiente,  Tome 
III.,  p.  131,  curiously  divides  this  into  two  councils.    This  blun- 


der is  also  made  by  Ivo,  cf.  Gratian's  Dec,  P.  I.,  Diet,  xvi.,  C. 
vii.,  note  by  correctors. 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


363 


faults  up  to  the  fifteenth  (as  was  said)  of  the  month  of  January,  of  the  fourth  Indiction, 
decreeing  from  the  present  time,  and  renewing  the  Canon  which  declares,  that  he  who 
has  been  joined  in  two  marriages  after  his  baptism,  or  has  had  a  concubine,  cannot  be 
bishop,  or  presbyter,  or  deacon,  or  at  all  on  the  sacerdotal  list ;  in  like  manner,  that  he 
who  has  taken  a  widow,  or  a  divorced  person,  or  a  harlot,  or  a  servant,  or  an  actress, 
cannot  be  bishop,  or  presbyter,  or  deacon,  or  at  all  on  the  sacerdotal  list. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  III. 


Priests  10J10  shall  have  contracted  second  mar- 
riages and  loill  not  give  them  up  arc  to  be  de- 
posed. But  those  who  leave  off  the  wickedness, 
let  them  cease  for  a  fired  period.  For  he  that 
is  himself  wounded  docs  not  bless.  But  who  are 
implicated  in  nefarious  marriage  and  who  after 
ordination  have  contracted  marriage,  after  a  def- 
inite time  they  shall  be  restored  to  their  grade, 
provided  they  remain  without  offence,  having 
plainly  broken  off  the  marriage.  But  if  after  it 
shall  have  been  prohibited  by  this  decree  they  at- 
tempt to  do  so  they  shall  remain  deposed. 

Zonaras. 

What  things  pertain  to  this  third  canon  are 
only  adapted  to  the  time  in  which  the  canon 
was  passed  ;  and  afterwards  are  of  no  force  at 
all.  But  what  things  the  Fathers  wished  to 
be  binding  on  posterity  are  contained  in  the 
seventeenth  and  eighteenth  canons  of  the 
holy  Apostles,  which  as  having  been  neglected 
during  the  course  of  time  this  synod  wished 
to  renew. 

Van  Espen. 

It  is  clear  from  this  canon  that  the  Emperor 
very  especially  intended  that  the  indulgence 
which  the  Church  of  Constantinople  extended 
to  its  presbyters  and  deacons  in  allowing 
them  the  use  of  marriage  entered  into  before 
ordination,  should  not  be  allowed  to  go  any 
further,  nor  to  be  an  occasion  for  the  viola- 
tion of  that  truly  Apostolic  canon,  "The 
bishop,  the  presbyter,  and  the  deacon  must  be 
the  husband  of  one  wife."    I.  Tim.  iii.  2. 

For  never  did  the  Constautinopolitan  nor 
any  other  Eastern  Church  allow  by  canon  a 
digamist  (or  a  man  successively  the  husband 
of  many  wives)  to  be  advanced  to  the  order 
of  presbyter  or  deacon,  or  to  use  any  second 
marriage. 

Antonio  Pereira. 

(Tentativa  Theologica.  [Eng.  trans.]  III.  Prin- 
ciple, p.  79.) 
In  the  same  manner  a  second  marriage  al- 
ways, and  everywhere,  incapacitated  the  clergy 
for  Holy  Orders  and  the  Episcopate.  This 
appears  from  St.  Paul,  1  Tim.  Chap,  iii.,  and 


Titus,  Chap,  i.,  and  it  was  expressly  enacted 
by  the  sixteenth  of  the  Apostolical  Canons, 
renewed  by  the  Popes  Siricius,  Innocent  and 
Leo  the  Great,  and  may  be  gathered  from  the 
ancient  fathers  and  councils  generally  re- 
ceived in  the  Church. 

Nevertheless  we  know  from  Theocloret, 
Bishoj:)  of  Cyrus,  that  many  bishops  remark- 
able for  their  learning  and  sanctity,  frequently 
dispensed  with  this  Apostolical  law  ;  as  Alex- 
ander of  Antioch,  Acacius  of  Berea,  Praylius 
of  Jerusalem,  Proclus  of  Constantinople,  and 
others,  by  whose  example  Theocloret  defends 
his  own  conduct  in  the  case  of  Irenseus,  in 
ordaining  him  Archbishop  of  Tyre,  although 
he  had  been  twice  married.  But  what  is 
more  surprising  in  this  matter  is  that,  not- 
withstanding the  eleventh  Decretal  of  Siri- 
cius, and  the  twelfth  of  Innocentius  the  First, 
that  they  who  had  either  been  twice  married, 
or  had  married  widows,  were  incapable  of  or- 
dination, and  ought  to  be  deposed  ;  the  Coun- 
cil of  Toledo,  Canon  3,  and  the  First  Council 
of  Orange,  Canon  25,  both  dispensed  with  these 
Pontifical  laws.  The  first,  in  order  that  those 
who  had  married  widows  might  remain  in 
holy  orders  ;  the  second,  that  such  as  had 
twice  married  might  be  promoted  to  the  order 
of  subdeacon.  Socrates  also  observes  that 
although  it  was  a  general  law  not  to  admit 
catechumens  to  orders,  the  bishops  of  Alex- 
andria were  in  the  habit  of  promoting  such 
to  the  order  of  readers  and  singers. 

Fleury. 
(H.  E.,  Liv.  XL.,  chap.  1.) 

These  canons  of  the  Council  of  Trullo  have 
served  ever  since  to  the  Greeks  and  to  all  the 
Christians  of  the  East  as  the  universal  rule 
with  regard  to  clerical  continence,and  they  have 
been  now  in  full  force  for  a  thousand  years. 
That  is  to  say,  It  is  not  permitted  to  men  who 
are  clerics  in  Holy  Orders  to  marry  after  their 
ordination.  Bishops  must  keep  perfect  con- 
tinence, whether  before  their  consecration 
they  are  married  or  not.  Priests,  deacons, 
and  subdeacons  already  married  can  keep 
their  wives  and  live  with  them,  except  on  the 
days  they  are  to  approach  the  holy  mysteries, 


364 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


CANON  IV. 

If  any  bishop,  presbyter,  deacon,  sub-deacon,  lector,  cantor,  or  door-keeper  has 
had  intercourse  with  a  woman  dedicated  to  God,  let  him  be  deposed,  as  one  who  has 
corrupted  a  spouse  of  Christ,  but  if  a  layman  let  him  be  cut  off. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  IV. 


A  cleric  coupled  to  a  spouse  of  God  shall  he 
deposed.  In  the  case  of  a  layman  he  sliall  be 
cut  off. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 


Canoniei,  Gratian's  Dccretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 
XXVII. ,  Q.   I.,  c.  vj. 

A  layman  ravishing  a  nun,  by  secular  law 
was  punished  by  death.  Balsamon  gives  the 
reference  thus  :  V  Cap.  primi  tit.  iiij.  lib. 
Basilic,  or  exxiij.  Novel. 


CANON  V. 

Let  none  of  those  who  are  on  the  priestly  list  possess  any  woman  or  maid  servant, 
beyond  those  who  are  enumerated  in  the  canon  as  being  persons  free  from  suspicion, 
preserving  himself  hereby  from  being  implicated  in  any  blame.  But  if  anyone  trans- 
gresses our  decree  let  him  be  deposed.  And  let  eunuchs  also  observe  the  same  rule, 
that  by  foresight  they  may  be  free  of  censure.  But  those  who  transgress,  let  them  be 
deposed,  if  indeed  they  are  clerics ;  but  if  laymen  let  them  be  excommunicated. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  V. 


A  2)ricst,  ccen  if  a  eunuch,  shall  not  hare  in 
his  house  a  maid  or  other  woman  except  those  on 
ivhom  no  suspicion  can  light. 


See  Canon  III.,  of  First  Ecumenical  Council 
at  Nice.     This  canon  adds  Eunuchs. 


CANON  VI. 

Since  it  is  declared  in  the  apostolic  canons  that  of  those  who  are  advanced  to  the 
clergy  unmarried,  only  lectors  and  cantors  are  able  to  marry ;  we  also,  maintaining  this, 
determine  that  henceforth  it  is  in  nowise  lawful  for  any  subdeacon,  deacon  or  presbyter 
after  his  ordination  to  contract  matrimony  but  if  he  shall  have  dared  to  do  so,  let  him 
be  deposed.  And  if  any  of  those  who  enter  the  clergy,  wishes  to  be  joined  to  a  wife  in 
lawful  marriage  before  he  is  ordained  subdeacon,  deacon,  or  presbyter,  let  it  be  done. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VI. 


If  any  ordained  person  contracts  matrimony, 
let  him  be  deposed.  If  he  wishes  to  be  married 
he  should  become  so  before  his  ordination. 

Aristenus  points  out  how  this  canon  annuls 
the  tenth  canon  of  Ancyra,  which  allows  a 
deacon  and  even  a  presbyter  to  marry  after 
ordination  and  continue  in  his  ministry,  pro- 


vided at  the  time  of  his  ordination  he  had  in 
the  presence  of  witnesses  declared  his  inabil- 
ity to  remain  chaste  or  his  desire  to  marry. 
This  present  canon  follows  the  XXVIth  of 
the  Apostolic  canons. 

The  last  clause  of  this  canon,  limited  in  its 
application  to  subdeacons,  is  found  in  the 
Corpus  Juris  Canoniei,  Gratian's  Decretum, 
ParsL.Dist.  XXXII.,  c.  vi. 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  093  365 


EXCURSUS  ON  THE  MARRIAGE  OF  THE  CLERGY. 

On  this  subject  there  is  a  popular  misconception  which  must  first  be  removed.  In  the 
popular  mind  to-day  there  is  no  distinction  between  "  a  married  clergy  "  being  allowed,  and 
"  the  marriage  of  the  clergy  "  being  allowed  ;  even  theological  writers  who  have  attained  some 
repute  have  confused  these  two  things  in  the  most  unfortunate  and  perplexing  fashion.  It 
will  suffice  to  mention  as  an  instance  of  this  Bp.  Harold  Browne  in  his  booh  on  the  XXXIX. 
Articles,  in  which  not  only  is  the  confusion  above  spoken  of  made,  but  the  very  blunder  is 
used  for  controversial  purposes,  to  back  up  and  support  by  the  authority  of  the  ancient 
Church  in  the  East  (which  allowed  a  .married  clergy)  the  practice  of  the  Nestorians  and  of 
the  modern  Church  of  England,  both  of  which  tolerate  the  marriage  of  the  clergy,  a  thing 
which  the  ancient  Church  abhorred  and  punished  with  deposition. 

I  cannot  better  express  the  doctrine  and  practice  of  the  ancient  Church  in  the  East  than 
by  quoting  the  words  of  the  Rev.  John  Fulton  in  the  Introduction  to  the  Third  Edition  of  his 
Index  Canonum}  He  says  :  "Marriage  was  no  impediment  to  ordination  even  as  a  Bishop  ; 
and  Bishops,  Priests,  and  Deacons,  equally  with  other  men,  were  forbidden  to  put  away  their 
wives  under  pretext  of  religion.  The  case  was  different  when  a  man  was  unmarried  at  the 
time  of  his  ordination.  Then  he  was  held  to  have  given  himself  wholly  to  God  in  the  office 
of  the  Holy  Ministry,  and  he  was  forbidden  to  take  back  from  his  offering  that  measure  of 
his  cares  and  his  affections  which  must  necessarily  be  given  to  the  maintenance  and  nurture 
of  his  family.  In  short,  the  married  man  might  be  ordained,  but  with  a  few  exceptions  no 
man  was  allowed  to  marry  after  ordination."  In  his  "Digest"  sub  voce  "Celibacy"  he  gives 
the  earliest  canon  law  on  the  subject  as  follows  :  "  None  of  the  clergy,  excej)t  readers  and 
singers  may  marry  after  ordination  (Ap.  Can.  xxvi.) ;  but  deacons  may  marry,  if  at  their  or- 
dination they  have  declared  an  intention  to  do  so  (Ancyra  x.).  A  priest  who  marries  is  to  be 
deposed  (Neocsesarea  i.).  A  deaconess  who  marries  is  to  be  anathematized  (Chal.  xv.) ;  a 
monk  or  dedicated  virgin  who  marries,  is  to  be  excommunicated  (Chal.  xvi.).  Those  who 
break  their  vows  of  celibacy  are  to  fulfil  the  penance  of  digamists  (Ancyra  xix.)."  2 

We  may  then  take  it  for  a  general  principle  that  in  no  part  of  the  ancient  Church  was  a 
priest  allowed  to  contract  holy  matrimony ;  and  in  no  place  was  he  allowed  to  exercise  his 
priesthood  afterwards,  if  he  should  dare  to  enter  into  such  a  relation  with  a  woman.  As  I 
have  so  often  remarked  it  is  not  my  place  to  approve  or  disapprove  this  law  of  the  Church, 
my  duty  is  the  much  simpler  one  of  tracing  historically  what  the  law  was  and  what  it  is  in 
the  East  and  West  to-day.  The  Reformers  considered  that  in  this,  as  in  most  other  matters, 
these  venerable  churches  had  made  a  mistake,  but  neither  the  maintenance  nor  the  disproof 
of  this  opinion  in  any  way  concerns  me,  so  far  as  this  volume  is  concerned.  All  that  is  neces- 
sary for  me  to  do  is  to  affirm  that  if  a  priest  were  at  any  time  to  attempt  to  marry,  he  would 
be  attempting  to  do  that  which  from  the  earliest  times  of  which  we  have  any  record,  no  priest 
has  ever  been  allowed  to  do,  but  which  always  has  been  punished  as  a  gross  sin  of  immo- 
rality. 

In  tracing  the  history  of  this  subject,  the  only  time  during  which  any  real  difficulty  pre- 
sents itself  is  the  first  three  centuries,  after  that  all  is  much  clearer,  and  my  duty  is  simply 
to  lay  the  undisputed  facts  of  the  case  before  the  reader. 

We  begin  then  with  the  debatable  ground.  And  first  with  regard  to  the  Lord,  "the 
great  High  Priest  of  our  profession,"  of  course  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  he  set  the  exam- 
ple, or — if  any  think  that  he  was  not  a  pattern  for  the  priests  of  his  Church  to  follow — at 
least  lived  the  life,  of  celibacy.  When  we  come  to  the  question  of  what  was  the  practice  of 
his  first  followers  in  this  matter,  there  would  likewise  seem  to  be  but  little  if  any  reasonable 

1  John  Ftfton,' Index  Canonum,  p.  29  (N.  Y.,  1892.)  2  Ibid.,  p.  294. 


366 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


doubt.  For  while  of  the  Apostles  we  have  it  recorded  only  of  Peter  that  he  was  a  married 
man,  we  have  it  also  expressly  recorded  that  in  his  case,  as  in  that  of  all  the  rest  who  had 
"forsaken  all"  to  follow  him,  the  Lord  himself  said,  "Every  one  that  hath  forsaken  houses, 
or  brethren,  or  sisters,  or  father,  or  mother,  or  wife,  or  children,  or  lands,  for  my  name's  sake 
shall  receive  an  hundred  fold  and  shall  inherit  eternal  life."  ! 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  St.  Paul  in  his  epistles  allows  and  even  contemplates  the 
probability  that  those  admitted  to  the  ranks  of  the  clergy  will  have  been  already  married, 
but  distinctly  says  that  they  must  have  been  the  "husband  of  one  wife,"2  by  which  all  an- 
tiquity and  every  commentator  of  gravity  recognizes  that  digamists  are  cut  off  from  the  pos- 
sibility of  ordination,  but  there  is  nothing  to  imply  that  the  marital  connexion  was  to  be 
continued  after  ordination.  For  a  thorough  treatment  of  this  whole  subject  from  the  ancient 
and  Patristic  point  of  view,  the  reader  is  referred  to  St.  Jerome.3 

The  next  stage  in  our  progress  is  marked  by  the  so-called  Apostolical  Canons.  Now  for 
those  who  hold  that  these  canons  had  directly  or  indirectly  the  Apostles  for  their  author,  or 
that  as  we  have  them  now  they  are  all  of  even  sub-Apostolic  date,  the  matter  becomes  more 
simple,  for  while  indeed  these  canons  do  not  expressly  set  forth  the  law  subsequently  formu- 
lated for  the  East,  they  certainly  seem  to  be  not  inconsistent  therewith,  but  rather  to  look 
that  way,  especially  Canons  V.  and  LI.  But  few  will  be  found  willing  to  support  so  extreme 
an  hypothesis,  and  while  indeed  many  scholars  are  of  opinion  that  most  of  the  canons  of  the 
collection  we  style  "Apostolical,"  are  ante-Nicene,  yet  they  will  not  be  recognized  as  of 
more  value  than  as  so  many  mirrors,  displaying  what  wras  at  their  date  considered  pure  dis- 
cipline. It  is  abundantly  clear  that  the  fathers  in  council  in  Truth  thought  the  discipline 
they  were  setting  forth  to  be  the  original  discipline  of  the  Church  in  the  matter,  and  the  dis- 
cipline of  the  West  an  innovation,  but  that  such  was  really  the  case  seems  far  from  certain. 
Thomassinus  treats  this  jDoint  with  much  learning,  and  I  shall  cite  some  of  the  authorities  he 
brings  forward.  Of  these  the  most  important  is  Eprphanius,  who  as  a  Greek  would  be  cer- 
tain to  give  the  tradition  of  the  East,  had  there  been  any  such  tradition  known  in  his  time. 
I  give  the  three  great  passages. 

"It  is  evident  that  those  from  the  priesthood  are  chiefly  taken  from  the  order  of  virgins, 
or  if  not  from  virgins,  at  least  from  monks  ;  or  if  not  from  the  order  of  monks,  then  they  are 
wont  to  be  made  priests  who  keep  themselves  from  their  wives,  or  who  are  widows  after  a 
single  marriage.  But  he  that  has  been  entangled  by  a  second  marriage  is  not  admitted  to 
priesthood  in  the  Church,  even  if  he  be  continent  from  his  wife,  or  be  a  widower.  Anyone 
of  this  sort  is  rejected  from  the  grade  of  bishop,  presbyter,  deacon,  or  subdeacon.  The 
order  of  reader,  however,  can  be  chosen  from  all  the  orders  these  grades  can  be  chosen  from, 
that  is  to  say  from  virgins,  monks,  the  continent,  widowers,  and  they  who  are  bound  by 
honest  marriage.  Moreover,  if  necessity  so  compel,  even  digamists  may  be  lectors,  for  such 
is  not  a  priest,  etc.,  etc."  i 

"  Christ  taught  us  by  an  example  that  the  priestly  work  and  ornaments  should  be  commu- 
nicated to  those  who  shall  have  preserved  their  continency  after  a  single  marriage,  or  shall 
have  persevered  in  virginity.  And  this  the  Apostles  thereafter  honestly  and  piously  decreed, 
through  the  ecclesiastical  canon  of  the  priesthood."5 

"Nay,  moreover,  lie  that  still  uses  marriage,  and  begets  children,  even  though  the 
husband  of  but  one  wife,  is  by  no  means  admitted  by  the  Church  to  the  order  of  deacon, 
presbyter,  bishop,  or  subdeacon.  But  for  all  this,  he  who  shall  have  kept  himself  from 
the  commerce  of  his  one  wife,  or  has  been  deprived  of  her,  may  be  ordained,  and  this  is 


1  Matt.  xix.  29  ;  Lk.  xviii.  29.  In  Mark  x.  29  is  found  the  same 
incident  recorded,  but  while  "  wife  "  is  mentioned  among  the 
things  "left,"  no  "wife"  is  found  among  the  things  pained. 

2  1  Tim.  iii.,  2  and  12  ;  Titus  [.,  6. 


3  Hieron.  Adv.  Jovin.  Lib.  I.     Confer  also  th?  1»  ApoJoj.  jtj 
libris  Adv.  Jovin. 

4  Epiph.  Exposit.  Fid.  Cath.,  c.  xxi. 
6  Ibid.  Haresi.  48.  n.  7. 


QUIJTCSEXT.     A.D.  693  367 


most  usually  the  case  in  those  places  where  the  ecclesiastical  canons  are  most  accurately 
observed."  1 

Nor  is  the  weight  of  this  evidence  lessened,  but  much  increased,  by  the  acknowledgment 
of  the  same  father  that  in  some  places  in  his  days  the  celibate  life  was  not  observed  by 
such  priests  as  had  wives,  for  he  explains  that  such  a  state  of  things  had  come  about  "not 
from  following  the  authority  of  the  canons,  but  through  the  neglect  of  men,  which  is  wont 
at  certain  periods  to  be  the  case."  2 

The  witness  of  the  Western  Fathers  although  so  absolutely  and  indisputably  clear  is  not 
so  conclusive  as  to  the  East,  and  yet  one  passage  from  St.  Jerome  should  be  quoted.  "  The 
Virgin  Christ  and  the  Virgin  Mary  dedicated  the  virginity  of  both  sexes.  The  Apostles  were 
chosen  when  either  virgins  or  continent  after  marriage,  and  bishops,  presbyters,  and  deacons 
are  chosen  either  when  virgins,  or  widowers,  or  at  least  continent  forever  after  the  priesthood."3 

It  would  be  out  of  place  to  enter  into  any  detailed  argument  upon  the  force  of  these 
passages,  but  I  shall  lay  before  the  reader  the  summing  up  of  the  whole  matter  by  a  weighty 
recent  writer  of  the  Ultramontane  Roman  School. 

"  Is  the  celibate  an  Apostolic  ordinance  ?  Bickel  affirmed  that  it  is,  and  Funk  denied 
it  in  1878.  To-day  [1896]  canonists  commonly  admit  that  one  cannot  prove  the  existence  of 
any  formal  precept,  either  divine  or  apostolic,  which  imposes  the  celibate  upon  the  clergy, 
and  that  all  the  texts,  whether  taken  out  of  Holy  Scripture  or  from  the  Fathers,  on  this  sub- 
ject contain  merely  a  counsel,  and  not  a  command."  "  In  the  Fourth  Century  a  great  num- 
ber of  councils  forbade  bishops,  priests,  and  deacons  to  live  in  the  use  of  marriage  with  their 
lawful  wives.  .  .  .  But  there  does  not  appear  to  have  been  any  disposition  to  declare  by 
law  as  invalid  the  marriages  of  clerics  in  Holy  Orders.  In  the  Fifth  and  Sixth  Centuries  the 
law  of  the  celibate  was  observed  by  all  the  Churches  of  the  West,  thanks  to  the  Councils  and 
to  the  Popes."  "  In  the  Seventh  and  down  to  the  end  of  the  Tenth  Century,4  as  a  matter  of 
fact  the  law  of  celibacy  was  little  observed  in  a  great  part  of  the  Western  Church,  but  as  a 
matter  of  law  the  Roman  Pontiffs  and  the  Councils  were  constant  in  their  proclamation  of 
its  obligation."  By  the  canonical  practice  of  the  unreformed  West,  the  reception  of  Holy 
Orders  is  an  impeclinientum  dirimens  matrimonii,  which  renders  any  marriage  subsequently 
contracted  not  only  illicit  but  absolutely  null.  On  this  diriment  impediment  the  same 
Roman  Catholic  writer  says  :  "  The  diriment  impediment  of  Holy  Orders  is  of  ecclesiastical 
obligation  and  not  of  divine,  and  consequently  the  Church  can  dispense  it.  This  is  the 
present  teaching  which  is  in  oj)position  to  that  of  the  old  schools." 

"  There  is  no  question  of  the  nullity  of  the  marriages  contracted  by  clerics  before  1139. 
At  the  Council  of  the  Lateran  of  that  year,  Innocent  II.  declared  that  these  marriages  con- 
tracted in  contempt  of  the  ecclesiastical  law  are  not  true  marriages  in  his  eyes.  His  suc- 
cessors do  not  seem  to  have  insisted  much  upon  this  new  diriment  impediment,  although  it 
was  attacked  most  vigorously  by  the  offending  clergymen  ;  but  the  School  of  Bologna,  the 
authoi'ity  of  which  was  then  undisputed,  openly  declared  for  the  nullity  of  the  marriages 
contracted  by  clerics  in  Holy  Orders.  Thus  it  is  that  this  point  of  law  has  been  settled 
rather  by  teaching,  than  by  any  precise  text,  or  by  any  law  of  a  known  date." 5 

It  should  not,  however,  be  forgotten  that  although  this  is  true  with  regard  to  Pope 
Innocent  II.  in  1139,  it  is  also  true  that  in  530  the  Emperor  Justinian  declared  null  and 
void  all  marriages  contracted  by  clerics  in  Holy  Orders,  and  the  children  of  such  marriages 
to  be  spurious  {spurii). 

The  reader  will  be  interested  in  reading  the  answer  on  this  point  made  by  King  Henry 

1  Epiph.  Hceresi.  59,  n.  4.  *  It  is  curious  that  this  is  just  four  centuries,  the  same  length 

2  Ibid,  ut  supra.  of  time  as  from  the  Reformation. 

8  Hieron  Apolog.  pro.  lib.  adv.  Jovin-  )     5  L'Ami  du  Clerge,  6  Aout,  1896,  pp.  67T  and  6T8, 


368 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


VIII.  to  the  letter  sent  him  by  the  German  ambassadors.1  I  can  here  give  but  a  part 
translated  into  English.  "Although  the  Church  from  the  beginning  admitted  married  men, 
as  priests  and  bishops,  who  were  without  crime,  the  husband  of  one  wife,  (out  of  the  necessity 
of  the  times,  as  sufficient  other  suitable  men  could  not  be  found  as  would  suffice  for  the 
teaching  of  the  world)  yet  Paul  himself  chose  the  celibate  Timothy  ;  but  if  anyone  came 
unmarried  to  the  priesthood  and  afterwards  took  a  wife,  he  was  always  deposed  from  the 
priesthood,  according  to  the  canon  of  the  Council  of  Neocsesarea  which  was  before  that  of 
Nice.  So,  too,  in  the  Council  of  Cbalcedon,  in  the  first  canon  of  which  all  former  canons 
are  confirmed,  it  is  established  that  a  deaconess,  if  she  give  herself  over  to  marriage,  shall 
remain  under  anathema,  and  a  virgin  who  had  dedicated  herself  to  God  and  a  monk  who 
join  themselves  in  marriage,  shall  remain  excommunicated.  .  .  .  No  Apostolic  canon 
nor  the  Council  of  Nice  contain  anything  similar  to  what  you  assert,  viz.  :  that  priests 
once  ordained  can  marry  afterwards.  And  with  this  statement  agrees  the  Sixth  Synod,  in 
which  it  was  decreed  that  if  any  of  the  clergy  should  wish  to  lead  a  wife,  he  should  do  so 
before  receiving  the  Subdiaconate,  since  afterwards  it  was  by  no  means  lawful ;  nor  was 
there  given  in  the  Sixth  Synod  any  liberty  to  priests  of  leading  wives  after  their  priesting, 
as  you  assert.  Therefox-e  from  the  beginning  of  the  newborn  Church  it  is  clearly  seen  that 
at  no  time  it  was  permitted  to  a  priest  to  lead  a  wife  after  his  priesting,  and  nowhere,  where 
this  was  attempted,  was  it  done  with  impunity,  but  the  culprit  was  deposed  from  his  priest- 
hood," 

CANON  VII. 

Since  we  have  learned  that  in  some  churches  deacons  hold  ecclesiastical  offices,  and 
that  hereby  some  of  them  with  arrogancy  and  license  sit  daringly  before  the  presby- 
ters :  we  have  determined  that  a  deacon,  even  if  in  an  office  of  dignity,  that  is  to  say, 
in  Avhatever  ecclesiastical  office  he  may  be,  is  not  to  have  his  seat  before  a  presbyter, 
except  he  is  acting  as  representative  of  his  own  patriarch  or  metropolitan  in  another 
city  under  another  superior,  for  then  he  shall  be  honoured  as  filling  his  place.  But  if 
anyone,  possessed  with  a  tyrannical  audacity,  shall  have  dared  to  do  such  a  thing,  let 
liim  be  ejected  from  his  peculiar  rank  and  be  last  of  all  of  the  order  in  whose  list  he  is 
in  his  own  church  ;  our  Lord  admonishing  us  that  we  are  not  to  delight  in  taking  the 
chief  seats,  according  to  the  doctrine  which  is  found  in  the  holy  Evangelist  Luke,  as  put 
forth  by  our  Lord  and  God  himself.  Eor  to  those  who  were  called  he  taught  this  para- 
ble :  "  When  ye  are  bidden  by  anyone  to  a  marriage  sit  not  down  in  the  highest  room 
lest  a  more  honourable  man  than  thou  shall  have  been  bidden  by  him ;  and  he  who 
bade  thee  and  him  come  and  say  to  thee :  Give  this  man  place,  and  thou  begin  with 
shame  to  take  the  lowest  room.  But  when  thou  art  bidden,  sit  down  in  the  lowest 
place,  so  that  when  he  who  bade  thee  cometh  he  may  say  to  thee,  Friend  go  up  higher : 
then  thou  shalt  have  worship  in  the  presence  of  them  that  sit  with  thee.  For  whoso- 
ever exalteth  himself  shall  be  abased,  and  he  that  humbleth  himself  shall  be  exalted." 
But  the  same  thing  also  shall  be  observed  in  the  remaining  sacred  orders ;  seeing  that 
we  know  that  spiritual  things  are  to  be  preferred  to  worldly  dignity. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VII. 

A  deacon  in  the  execution  of  his  office,  if  he 
shall  have  occasion  to  sit  in  the  presence  of  pres- 
byters, shall  take  the  lowest  place  unless  he  be  the 
representative  of  the  Patriarch  or  bishop. 

Balsamon,   Zonaras,    and   following    them 


Van  Espen  point  out  that  this  canon  is  a  re- 
laxation of  the  XVIII.  Canon  of  Nice  which 
punishes  presumptuous  deacons  not  only  with 
loss  of  rank  in  their  grade,  but  also  with  ex- 
pulsion from  their  ministry. 

Van  Espen  well  remarks  that  the  Fathers 
of  this  synod  had  in  mind  not  only  the  pres- 


1  This  letter  is  found  in  full  in  the  Addenda  to  the  Appendix  at  the  end  of  the  seventh  volume  of  Burnet's  History  of  the  Refor- 
mation (London.   Orr  &  Co.,  1850,  p.  cslviij.). 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


369 


ervation  of  the  distinction  between  deacons 
and  presbyters,  but  also  between  those  in 
ecclesiastical  orders  and  those  enjoying  secu- 
lar dignities  with  regard  to  ecclesiastical 
matters,  but  who  were  not  to  gain  therefrom 
ecclesiastical  precedence.  This  is  what  is 
meant  by  the  last  clause  of  the  canon. 


Beveridge  gives  a  list  of  these  quasi  ecclesi- 
astical dignitaries  as  follows  :  Magnus  (Econo- 
mus,  Magno  Sacello  Prsepositus,  Magnus 
Vasorum  Custos,  Chartophylax,  Parvo  Sacello 
Propositus,  Primus  Defensor. 


CANON  VIII. 

Since  we  desire  that  in  every  point  the  things  which  have  been  decreed  by  our  holy 
fathers  may  also  be  established  and  confirmed,  we  hereby  renew  the  canon  which  orders 
that  synods  of  the  bishops  of  each  province  be  held  every  year  where  the  bishop  of  the 
metropolis  shall  deem  best.  But  since  on  account  of  the  incursions  of  barbarians  and 
certain  other  incidental  causes,  those  who  preside  over  the  churches  cannot  hold  synods 
twice  a  year,  it  seems  right  that  by  all  means  once  a  year — on  account  of  ecclesiastical 
questions  which  are  likely  to  arise — a  synod  of  the  aforesaid  bishops  should  be  holden 
in  every  province,  between  the  holy  feast  of  Easter  and  October,  as  has  been  said  above, 
in  the  place  which  the  Metropolitan  shall  have  deemed  most  fitting.  And  let  such 
bishops  as  do  not  attend,  when  they  are  at  home  in  their  own  cities  and  are  in  good 
health,  and  free  from  all  unavoidable  and  necessary  business,  be  fraternally  reproved. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VIII. 
Whenever  it  is  impossible  to  hold  tivo  synods  a 
year,  one  at  least  shall  be  celebrated,  between  East- 
er and  the  month  of  October. 

This  canon  under  the  name  of  the  "  Sixth 
Synod"  is  referred  to  in  Canon  VI.  of  the 
Seventh  Ecumenical  Council  (II.  Nice),  and 


the   bishops    of  Quinisext   are   called   "  Fa- 
thers." 

Van  Espen. 

What  at  first  was  only  allowed  on  account 
of  necessity,  little  by  little  passed  into  gen- 
eral laAv,  and  at  last  was  received  as  law,  that 
once  a  year  there  was  to  be  a  meeting  of  the 
provincial  synod. 


CANON  IX. 

Let  no  cleric  be  permitted  to  keep  a  "  public  house."  For  if  it  be  not  permitted 
to  enter  a  tavern,  much  more  is  it  forbidden  to  serve  others  in  it  and  to  carry  on  a  trade 
which  is  unlawful  for  him.  But  if  he  shall  have  done  any  such  thing,  either  let  him 
desist  or  be  deposed. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  IX.  I     Compare  with  this  canon  liv.  of  the  Apos- 

If  clerics  are  forbidden  to  enter  public  houses,   tolic  Canons  ;  xxiv.  of  Laodicea  ;  and  xliij.  of 
much  more  are  they  forbidden  to  Tceep  them.   Let  tne  Synod  of  Carthage,1 
them  either  give  them  up  or  be  deposed.  ' 


CANON  X. 

A  bishop,  or  presbyter,  or  deacon  who  receives  usury,  or  what  is  called  hecatostce, 
let  him  desist  or  be  deposed. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  X. 
A   bishop,  presbyter,    or   deacon    who    takes 
usury  shall  be  deposed  unless  he  stops  doing  so. 


See  notes  on  canon  XVI.  of  Nice,  and  the 
Excursus  thereto  appended. 


1  It  is  curious  that  Balsamon  quotes  this  canon  at  si.,  i.e.,  the  Latin  numbering  and  not  the  Greek  which  he  himself  uses  in  his 
scholia. 


VOL.    XIV. 


Bb 


370 


QUINISEXT.    A.D.  692 


CANON  XI. 

Let  no  one  in  the  priestly  order  nor  any  layman  eat  the  unleavened  bread  of  the 
Jews,  nor  have  any  familiar  intercourse  with  them,  nor  summon  them  in  illness,  nor  re- 
ceive medicines  from  them,  nor  bathe  with  them  ;  but  if  anyone  shall  take  in  hand  to  do 
so,  if  he  is  a  cleric,  let  him  be  deposed,  but  if  a  layman  let  him  be  cut  off. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XI. 


Jewish  unleavened  bread  is  to  be  refused.  Who- 
ever even  calls  in  Jeivs  as  physicians  or  bathes 
with  them  is  to  be  deposed. 

Van  Espen. 

Theodore  Balsamon  is  of  opinion  that  this 
canon  does  not  forbid  the  eating  of  unleav- 
ened bread  ;  but  that  what  is  intended  is  the 
keeping  of  feasts  in  a  Jewish  fashion,  or  in 
sacrifices  to  use  unleavened  bread  (asymcs), 
and  this,  says  Balsamon,  on  account  of  the 
Latins  who  celebrate  their  feasts  with  azymes. 

Canon  lxix.  [i.e.,  lxx.]  of  those  commonly 
called  Apostolic   forbids  the  observance  of 


festivals  with  the  Jews  ;  and  declares  it  to  be 
unlawful  to  receive  manuscula  from  them,  but 
by  this  canon  all  familiar  intercourse  with 
them  is  forbidden. 

While  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  in  all  the 
Trullan  canons  there  is  an  undercurrent  of 
hostility  to  the  West,  yet  in  this  canon  I  can 
see  no  such  spirit,  and  I  think  it  has  been 
read  into  it  by  the  greater  bitterness  of  later 
times.  This  seems  the  more  certain  from  the 
fact  that  there  is  nothing  new  whatever  in  the 
provision  with  respect  to  the  passover  bread, 
vide  canons  of  Laodicea  xxxvij.  and  xxxviij. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris  Can- 
onic! ,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 
xxviij.,  can,  xiii.1 


CANON  XII. 

Moreover  this  also  has  come  to  our  knowledge,  that  in  Africa  and  Libya  and  in 
other  places  the  most  God-beloved  bishops  in  those  parts  do  not  refuse  to  live  with 
their  wives,  even  after  consecration,  thereby  giving  scandal  and  offence  to  the  people. 
Since,  therefore,  it  is  our  particular  care  that  all  things  tend  to  the  good  of  the  flock 
placed  in  our  hands  and  committed  to  us, — it  has  seemed  good  that  henceforth  nothing 
of  the  kind  shall  in  any  way  occur.  And  we  say  this,  not  to  abolish  and  overthrow 
what  things  were  established  of  old  by  Apostolic  authority,  but  as  caring  for  the  health 
of  the  people  and  their  advance  to  better  things,  and  lest  the  ecclesiastical  state  should 
suffer  any  reproach.  For  the  divine  Apostle  says  :  "  Do  all  to  the  glory  of  God,  give 
none  offence,  neither  to  the  Jews,  nor  to  the  Greeks,  nor  to  the  Church  of  God,  even  as 
I  please  all  men  in  all  things,  not  seeking  mine  own  profit  but  the  profit  of  many,  that 
they  may  be  saved.  Be  ye  imitators  of  me  even  as  I  also  am  of  Christ."  But  if  any 
shall  have  been  observed  to  do  such  a  thing,  let  him  be  deposed. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XII. 


Although  it  has  been  decreed  that  wives  are 
not  to  be  cast  forth,  nevertheless  that  we  may 
counsel  for  the  better,  we  give  command  that  no 
one  ordained  a  bishop  shall  any  longer  live  with 
his  wife. 

Akistenus. 

The  fifth  Apostolic  canon  allows  neither 
bishop,  presbyter,  nor  deacon  to  cast  forth  his 


wife  under  pretext  of  piety  ;  and  assigns  pen- 
alties for  any  that  shall  do  so,  and  if  he  will 
not  amend  he  is  to  be  deposed.  But  this 
canon  on  the  other  hand  does  not  permit  a 
bishop  even  to  live  with  his  wife  after  his  conse- 
cration. But  by  this  change  no  contempt  is 
meant  to  be  poured  out  upon  what  had  been 
established  by  Apostolic  authority,  but  it  was 
made  through  care  for  the  people's  health  and 
for  leading  on  to  better  things,  and  for  fear 


1  Van  Espen  says  that  in  his  copy  of  Gratian  this  canon  is  as- 
signed to  the  Vllth  Synod.  Snch  "is  not  the  case  in  the  edition 
in  Migne's  Patrologia  Latina,  where  the  reference  is  given  as 


exTl.  Synodo.  c.  II.,  and  Judceorum  is  found  in  the  text  in- 
stead of  the  eorum  of  which  Van  Espen  complains. 


QUINTSEXT.     A.D.  692 


371 


that  the  sacerdotal  estate  might  suffer  some 
•wrong. 

Van  Espen. 
(In  Can.  vi.  Apost.) 
In  the  time  of  this  canon  [of  the  Apostles 
so  called]  not  only  presbyters  and  deacons, 
but  bishops  also,  it  is  clear,  were  allowed  by 
Eastern  custom  to  have  their  wives ;  and 
Zonaras  and  Balsamon  note  that  even  until 
the  Sixth  Council,  commonly  called  in  Trullo, 
bishops  were  allowed  to  have  their  wives. 

(The  same  on  this  canon.) 
But  not  only  do  they  command  [in  this 
canon]  that  bishops  after  their  consecration 
no  longer  have  commerce  with  their  own 
wives,  but  further,  they  prohibit  them  even 
to  presume  to  live  with  them. 

Zonaras. 
When  the  faith  first  was  born  and  came 


forth  into  the  world,  the  Apostles  treated 
with  greater  softness  and  indulgence  those 
who  embraced  the  truth,  which  as  yet  was 
not  scattered  far  and  wide,  nor  did  they  exact 
from  them  perfection  in  all  respects,  but 
made  great  allowances  for  their  weakness 
and  for  the  inveterate  force  of  the  customs 
with  which  they  were  surrounded,  both  among 
the  heathen  and  among  the  Jews.  But  now, 
when  far  and  wide  our  religion  has  been  prop- 
agated, more  strenuous  efforts  were  made  to 
enforce  those  things  which  pertain  to  a  higher 
and  holier  life,  as  our  angelical  worship  in- 
creased day  by  day,  and  to  insist  on  by  law  a 
life  of  continence  to  those  who  were  elevated 
to  the  episcopate,  so  that  not  only  they  should 
abstain  from  their  wives,  but  that  they  should 
have  them  no  longer  as  bed-fellows  ;  and  not 
only  that  they  no  longer  admit  them  as 
sharers  of  their  bed,  but  they  do  not  allow 
them  even  to  stop  under  the  same  roof  or  in 
the  house. 


CANON   XIII. 

Since  we  know  it  to  be  handed  down  as  a  rule  of  the  Roman  Church  that  those  who 
are  deemed  worthy  to  be  advanced  to  the  diaconate  or  presbyterate  should  promise  no 
longer  to  cohabit  with  their  wives,  we,  preserving  the  ancient  rule  and  apostolic  perfec- 
tion and  order,  will  that  the  lawful  marriages  of  men  who  are  in  holy  orders  be  from  this 
time  forward  firm,  by  no  means  dissolving  their  union  with  their  wives  nor  depriving 
them  of  their  mutual  intercourse  at  a  convenient  time.  Wherefore,  if  anyone  shall 
have  been  found  worthy  to  be  ordained  subdeacon,  or  deacon,  or  presbyter,  he  is  by  no 
means  to  be  prohibited  from  admittance  to  such  a  rank,  even  if  he  shall  live  with  a  law- 
ful wife.  Nor  shall  it  be  demanded  of  him  at  the  time  of  his  ordination  that  he  promise 
to  abstain  from  lawful  intercourse  with  his  wife  :  lest  we  should  affect  injuriously  mar- 
riage constituted  by  God  and  blessed  by  his  presence,  as  the  Gospel  saith :  "  What 
God  hath  joined  together  let  no  man  put  asunder ;  "  and  the  Apostle  saith,  "  Marriage 
is  honourable  and  the  bed  undefiled ; "  and  again,  "Art  thou  bound  to  a  wife?  seek 
not  to  be  loosed."  But  Ave  know,  as  they  who  assembled  at  Carthage  (with  a  care  for 
the  honest  life  of  the  clergy)  said,  that  subdeacons,  who  handle  the  Holy  M/ysteries, 
and  deacons,  and  presbyters  should  abstain  from  their  consorts  according  to  their  own 
course  [of  ministration].  So  that  what  has  been  handed  down  through  the  Apos- 
tles and  preserved  by  ancient  custom,  we  too  likewise  maintain,  knowing  that  there  is 
a  time  for  all  things  and  especially  for  fasting  and  prayer.  For  it  is  meet  that  they 
who  assist  at  the  divine  altar  should  be  absolutely  continent  when  they  are  handling 
holy  things,  in  order  that  they  may  be  able  to  obtain  from  God  what  they  ask  in 
sincerity. 

If  therefore  anyone  shall  have  dared,  contrary  to  the  Apostolic  Canons,  to  deprive 
any  of  those  who  are  in  holy  orders,  presbyter,  or  deacon,  or  subdeacon  of  cohabita- 
tion and  intercourse  with  his  lawful  wife,  let  him  be  deposed.  In  like  manner  also  if 
any  presbyter  or  deacon  on  pretence  of  piety  has  dismissed  his  Avife,  let  him  be  excluded 
from  communion  ;  and  if  he  persevere  in  this  let  him  be  deposed. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XIII. 


NOTES. 

ordained  deacon  or  presbyter  shoidd  put  away 


Although    the    Romans    wish  that 


everyone 

B  b  2 


Jiis  tvife,  we  wish  the  marriages  of  deacons  and 
presbyters  to  continue  valid  and  firm. 


m 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


Fleuky. 

(H.E.,  Livre  XL.,  chap.  1.) 
What  is  said  in  this  canon,  that  the  council 
of  Carthage  orders  priests  to  abstain  from 
their  wives  at  prescribed  periods,  is  a  mis- 
understanding of  the  decree,  caused  either 
by  malice  or  by  ignorance.  This  canon  is  one 
of  those  adopted  by  the  Fifth  Council  of 
Carthage  held  in  the  year  400,  and  it  is 
decreed  that  subdeacons,  deacons,  priests, 
and  bishops  shall  abstain  from  their  wives, 
following  the  ancient  statutes,  and  shall  be  as 
though  they  had  them  not.  The  Greek  ver- 
sion of  this  canon  has  rendered  the  Latin 
words  priora  statuta  by  these,  idious  liorous, 
which  may  mean  "fixed  times":  for  the 
translator  read,  following  another  codex, 
'propria  for  priora.  Be  this  as  it  may,  the 
Fathers  of  the  Trullan  council  supposed  that 
this  obliged  the  clergy  only  to  continence  at 
certain  fixed  times,  and  were  not  willing  to 
see  that  it  included  bishops  as  well. 

Van  Espen. 

Although  the  Latin  Church  does  not  dis- 
approve,1 as  contrary  to  the  law  of  the  Gospel 
the  discipline  of  the  Greeks  which  allows  the 


use  of  marriage  to  presbyters  and  deacons, 
provided  it  was  contracted  before  ordination  ; 
yet  never  has  it  approved  this  canon  which 
with  too  great  zeal  condemns  the  opposite 
custom,  and  rashly  assigns  great  errors  to  the 
Koman  Church. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Becretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
XXXI.,  c.  xiij. 

Antonius  Augustinus  in  his  proposed 
emendations  of  Gratian  says  {Lib.  I.  dial,  de 
emend.  Grat,  c.  8.) :  "  This  canon  can  in  no 
way  be  received  ;  for  it  is  written  in  opposi- 
tion to  the  celibacy  of  the  Latin  priests,  and 
openly  is  against  the  Roman  Church."  But 
to  me  the  note  which  Gratian  appends  seems 
much  more  learned  and  true :  "  This  how- 
ever must  be  understood  as  of  local  applica- 
tion ;  for  the  Eastern  Church,  to  which  the  VI. 
Synod  prescribed  this  rule,  did  not  receive  a 
vow  of  chastity  from  the  ministers  of  the 
altar."  It  may  be  well  to  note  here  that  by 
the  opinion  of  most  Latin  casuists  the  obli- 
gation to  chastity  among  the  Roman  clergy 
rests  upon  the  vow  and  not  upon  any  law  of 
the  Church  binding  thereto.  This  evidently 
was  the  opinion  of  Gratian. 


CANON  XIV. 

Let  the  canon  of  our  holy  God-bearing  Fathers  be  confirmed  in  this  particular 
also ;  that  a  presbyter  be  not  ordained  before  he  is  thirty  years  of  age,  even  if  he  be  a 
very  worthy  man,  but  let  him  be  kept  back.  For  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  was  baptized 
and  began  to  teach  when  he  was  thirty.  In  like  manner  let  no  deacon  be  ordained 
before  he  is  twenty-five,  nor  a  deaconess  before  she  is  forty. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XIV. 


A  presbyter  thirty  years  of  age,  a  deacon 
twenty-five,  and  a  deaconess  forty. 

Compare  Canon  XL  of  Neocaesarea. 

It  may  be  interesting  to  note  here  that  by 
the  law  of  the  Roman  Communion  the  canon- 
ical ages  are  as  follows  : 

A  subdeacon  must  have  comjrieted  his 
twenty-first  year,  a  deacon  his  twenty-second, 
a  priest  his  twenty-fourth,  and  a  bishop  his 
thirtieth.  None  of  the  inferior  clergy  can 
hold  a  simple  benefice  before  he  has  begun 
his  fourteenth  year.     Ecclesiastical  dignities, 


such  as  Cathedral  canonries,  cannot  be  con- 
ferred on  any  who  have  not  finished  the 
twenty-second  year.  A  benefice  to  which  is 
attached  a  cure  of  souls  can  be  given  only 
to  one  who  is  over  twenty-four,  and  a  diocese 
only  to  one  who  has  completed  his  thirtieth 
year.     (Vide  Ferraris,  Bibliothcca  Prompta.) 

In  the  Anglican  Communion  the  ages  are, 
in  England,  for  a  bishop  "  fully  thirty  years 
of  age,"  for  a  priest  twenty-four,  and  for  a 
deacon  twenty-three : 2  and  in  the  United 
States,  for  a  bishop  thirty  years  of  age,  for  a 
priest  twenty-four,  and  for  a  deacon  twenty- 
one. 


1  Clement  VIII.  made  a  decree  in  conformity  with  this  canon 
that  a  Greek  presbyter  who  was  married  shall  abstain  from  his 
wife  for  a  week  or  three  days  before  he  offered  the  sacrifice  of 
the  mass.     Const.  33,  in  Bull.  Horn.  (cit.  Van  Espen  I.  c.) 


2  A  faculty  is  allowed  for  earlier  ordination,  but  since  1804 
only  to  be  granted  by  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury.  This  lim- 
itation is,  however,  only  of  Parliamentary  sanction  (44  Geo.  in., 
ch.  43). 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


373 


CANON  XV. 

A  SUBDEACON  is  not  to  be  ordained  under  twenty  years  of  age.  And  if  any  one  in 
any  grade  of  the  priesthood  shall  have  been  ordained  contrary  to  the  prescribed  time 
let  him  be  deposed. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XV.  This  age  seems  first  to  have  been  fixed  by 

Those  shall  be  chosen  as  Subcleacons  who  are  the  Second   Council  of  Toledo  J    (circa,  a.d. 
twenty  years  of  age.  535)  in  its  first  canon. 


CANON  XVI. 

Since  the  book  of  the  Acts  tells  us  that  seven  deacons  were  appointed  by  the  Apos- 
tles, and  the  synod  of  Neocaesarea  in  the  canons  which  it  put  forth  determined  that 
there  ought  to  be  canonically  only  seven  deacons,  even  if  the  city  be  very  large,  in 
accordance  with  the  book  of  the  Acts  ;  we,  having  fitted  the  mind  of  the  fathers  to  the 
Apostles'  words,  find  that  they  spoke  not  of  those  men  who  ministered  at  the  Mysteries 
but  in  the  administration  which  pertains  to  the  serving  of  tables.  For  the  book  of  the 
Acts  reads  as  follows  :  "  In  those  days,  when  the  number  of  the  disciples  was  multiplied, 
there  arose  a  murmuring  dissension  of  the  Grecians  against  the  Hebrews,  because  their 
widows  were  neglected  in  the  daily  ministrations.  And  the  Twelve  called  the  multitude 
of  the  disciples  with  them  and  said,  It  is  not  meet  for  us  to  leave  the  word  of  God  and 
serve  tables.  Look  ye  out  therefore,  brethren,  from  among  you  seven  men  of  good  report 
full  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  of  wisdom,  whom  we  may  appoint  over  this  business.  But  we 
will  give  ourselves  continually  unto  prayer  and  unto  the  ministry  of  the  word.  And  the 
saying  pleased  the  whole  multitude  :  and  they  chose  Stephen  a  man  full  of  faith  and  of 
the  Holy  Ghost,  and  Philip,  and  Prochorus,  and  Nicanor,  and  Timon,  and  Parmenas, 
and  Nicolas  a  proselyte  of  Antioch  :  whom  they  set  before  the  Apostles." 

John  Chrysostom,  a  Doctor  of  the  Church,  interpreting  these  words,  proceeds  thus  : 
"  It  is  a  remarkable  fact  that  the  multitude  was  not  divided  in  its  choice  of  the  men,  and 
that  the  Apostles  were  not  rejected  by  them.  But  we  must  learn  what  sort  of  rank  they 
had,  and  what  ordination  they  received.  Was  it  that  of  deacons  ?  But  this  office  did 
not  yet  exist  in  the  churches.  But  was  it  the  dispensation  of  a  presbyter  ?  But  there 
was  not  as  yet  any  bishop,  but  only  Apostles,  whence  I  think  it  is  clear  and  manifest 
that  neither  of  deacons  nor  of  presbyters  was  there  then  the  name."  2 

But  on  this  account  therefore  we  also  announce  that  the  aforesaid  seven  deacons 
are  not  to  be  understood  as  deacons  who  served  at  the  Mysteries,  according  to  the 
teaching  before  set  forth,  but  that  they  were  those  to  whom  a  dispensation  was  en- 
trusted for  the  common  benefit  of  those  that  were  gathered  together,  who  to  us  in  this 
also  were  a  type  of  philanthropy  and  zeal  towards  those  who  are  in  need. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XVI. 


Whoever  affirms  that  the  number  of  deacons 
should  be  seven  according  to  the  saying  of  the 
Acts,  should  know  that  the  reference  in  that  pas- 
sage is  not  to  Deacons  of  the  Mysteries  but  to  such 
as  serve  tables. 

Van  Espen  here  reminds  us  that  this  is,  as 


Zonaras  calls  attention  to  in  his  scholion  on 
this  place,  a  correction  rather  than  an  inter- 
pretation of  the  XVth  Canon  of  Neocsesarea, 
and  Balsamon  also  says  the  same.  The  only 
interest  that  the  matter  possesses  is  that  a 
canon  which  had  been  received  by  the  Fourth 
Ecumenical  Council  (Chalcedon)  should  re- 
ceive such  treatment  from  such  an  assembly 
as  the  Synod  in  Trullo. 


1  It  is  curious  that  so  learned  a  scholar  as  the  late  Henry  Brad-  j  adopts,  and  is  also  the  one  given  to  the  council  by  the  editors  of 
shaw  in  his  article  "  Subdeacon"  in  Smith  &  Cheetham's  Diction-    L' Art  de  Verifier  les  dates. 

ary  of  Christ.  Antiq.  should  give  the  date  of  this  synod  as  447.  ;  2 1  have  not  followed  the  Oxford  translation,  which  seems  to 
Hefele  fixes  it  at  527  or  531.  Baronius,  Binins,  Labbe,  and  many  i  me  to  have  reversed  the  point.  In  a  foot-note  to  that  translation 
others  at  531.  A  very  ancient  MS.  assigns  it  to  the  year  5C5  of  the  (Chrysostom  on  Acts,  Part  I.,  p.  199)  will  be  found  a  translation 
Spanish  era,  i.e.  527,  and  this  is  the  date  Cardinal  de  Aguirre  |  of  this  canon. 


374 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


CANON   XVII. 

Since  clerics  of  different  churches  have  left  their  own  churches  in  which  they  were 
ordained  and  betaken  themselves  to  other  bishops,  and  without  the  consent  of  their 
own  bishop  have  been  settled  in  other  churches,  and  thus  they  have  proved  themselves 
to  be  insolent  and  disobedient ;  we  decree  that  from  the  month  of  January  of  the  past 
IVth  Indiction  no  cleric,  of  whatsoever  grade  he  be,  shall  have  power,  without  letters 
dimissory  of  his  own  bishop,  to  be  registered  in  the  clergy  list  of  another  church.  Who- 
ever in  future  shall  not  have  observed  this  rule,  but  shall  have  brought  disgrace  upon 
himself  as  well  as  on  the  bishop  who  ordained  him,  let  him  be  deposed  together  with 
him  who  also  received  him. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XVII. 
Whoever  receives  and  ordains   a  wandering 
cleric  shall  be  deposed  together  ivith  him  thus 
wickedly  ordained. 


This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decrctum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 
XXI.,  Qusest.,  ii.  can.  j. 


CANON  XVIII. 

Those  clerics  who  in  consequence  of  a  barbaric  incursion  or  on  account  of  any  other 
circumstance  have  gone  abroad,  we  order  to  return  again  to  their  churches  after  the 
cause  has  passed  away,  or  when  the  incursion  of  the  barbarians  is  at  an  end.  Nor  are 
they  to  leave  them  for  long  without  cause.  If  anyone  shall  not  have  returned  accord- 
ing to  the  direction  of  this  present  canon — let  him  be  cut  off  until  he  shall  return  to  his 
own  church.     And  the  same  shall  be  the  punishment  of  the  bishop  who  received  him. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XVIII. 


Whoever  has  emigrated  on  account  of  an 
invasion  of  the  barbarians,  shall  return  to  the 
Church  to  whose  clergy  he  belongs  as  soon  as  the 
incursion  ceases.  But  if  he  shall  not  do  so,  he 
shall  be  cut  of  together  with  him  to  whom  he 
has  gone. 

Balsamon. 

The  Fathers  are  worthy  of  great  praise. 
For  liaving  regard  to  the  honour  of  the  ec- 
clesiastical order  and  of  each  bishop,  they 
have  decreed  that  clergymen,  Avho  from  just 
and  valid  causes  have  gone  forth  without 
letters  dimissory  from  those  who  ordained 
them,  should  return  to  their  own  clergy  as 


soon  as  the  cause  which  drove  them  forth 
ceases  ;  and  that  they  should  not  be  enrolled 
on  the  clergy  list  of  any  other  church.  But 
whosoever  cannot  be  persuaded  to  return  is 
to  be  cut  off,  as  well  as  the  bishop  who  de- 
tains him.  But  someone  will  say,  If  a  bish- 
op who  does  such  a  thing  is  cut  off  by  his 
Metropolitan  ;  and  likewise  if  a  Metropolitan 
spurns  this  canon  he  is  punished  by  the  Patri- 
arch. But  if  an  autocephalous  archbishop  or 
a  Patriarch  other  than  the  Patriarch  of  Con- 
stantinople (for  he  has  a  faculty  for  doing  so) 
should  be  convicted  of  a  breach  of  this  Canon, 
by  whom  would  he  be  cut  off?  I  suppose  by 
the  Supreme  Pontiff '  (oto/xat  ovv  napd  rov  fxutp- 
vos  dpxie/jecos). 


CANON  XIX. 

It  behoves  those  who  preside  over  the  churches,  every  day  but  especially  on  Lord's 
days,  to  teach  all  the  clergy  and  people  words  of  piety  and  of  right  religion,  gathering 
out  of  holy  Scripture  meditations  and  determinations  of  the  truth,  and  not  going  beyond 
the  limits  now  fixed,  nor  varying  from  the  tradition  of  the  God-bearing  fathers.  And  if 
any  controversy  in  regard  to  Scripture  shall  have  been  raised,  let  them  not  interpret  it 
otherwise  than  as  the  lights  and  doctors  of  the  church  in  their  writings  have  expounded 
it,  and  in  these  let  them  glory  rather  than  in  composing  things  out  of  their  own  heads, 
lest  through  their  lack  of  skill 2  they  may  have  departed  from  what  was  fitting.     For 

1  Can  this  mean  the  Pope  ?  a  I  have  followed  the  reading  inelpiot. 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


375 


through  the  doctrine  of  the  aforesaid  fathers,  the  people  coming  to  the  knowledge  of 
what  is  good  and  desirable,  as  well  as  what  is  useless  and  to  be  rejected,  will  remodel 
their  life  for  the  better,  and  not  be  led  by  ignorance,  but  applying  their  minds  to  the 
doctrine,  they  will  take  heed  that  no  evil  befall  them  and  work  out  their  salvation  in 
fear  of  impending  punishment. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XIX. 

The  prelates  of  the  Church,  especially  upon 
Lord's  days,  shall  teach  doctrine. 

Van  Espen. 

How  great  an  obligation  of  preaching  rests 
upon  bishops,  the  successors  of  the  Apostles, 
is  evident  from  the  words  of  St.  Paul,  "  Christ 
sent  me  not  to  baptize  but  to  preach"  (1  Cor. 
i.,  17),  and  his  chief  adjuration  to  Timothy 
though  Jesus  Christ  and  his  coming,  was 
"  Preach  the  Word  "  (2  Tim.  ii.  4.)  For  this 
reason  the  fathers  formerly  called  the  epis- 
copate the  preaching-office  (officium predicatio- 
nis),  as  is  evident  from  the  profession  of  Adel- 
bert  Morinensis,  and  the  form  of  profession 
of  a  future  Archbishop.  Both  of  these  will 
be  found  in  Labbe,  appendix  to  Tom.  VIII., 
of  his  Concilia. 


Council  of  Trent. 
{Sess.  V,  c.  2.) 
The  preaching  of  the  Gospel   is  the  chief 
work  of  bishops. 

Convocation  of  Canterbury,  a.d.  1571. 
(Cardwell.  Synodalia,  Vol.  I.,  p.  126.) 
The  clergy  will  be  careful  to  teach  nothing 
in  their  sermons  to  be  religiously  held  and 
believed  by  the  people  except  what  is  agree- 
able to  the  doctrine  of  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ment, and  what  the  Catholic  Fathers  and  An- 
cient Bishops  have  collected  out  of  the  same.1 

Council  of  Trent. 
(Sess.  IV.) 
No  one   shall   dare  to  interpret  the  Holy 
Scripture  contrary  to  the  unanimous  consent 
of  the  fathers. 


CANON  XX. 

It  shall  not  be  lawful  for  a  bishop  to  teach  publicly  in  any  city  which  does  not  be- 
long to  him.  If  any  shall  have  been  observed  doing  this,  let  him  cease  from  his  epis- 
copate, but  let  him  discharge  the  office  of  a  presbyter. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XX. 


The  bishop  of  one  city  shall  not  teach  publicly 


Balsamon  and  Zonaras  think  that  the  Bishop 
is  not  to  be  deposed  from  his  Episcopate,  but 
only  shorn  of  his  right  of  executing  the  Epis- 


in  another.  If  he  shall  be  shown  to  hare  done  so  t  al  functions  so  that  he  wiu  virtually  be 
he  shall  be  deprived  of  the  episcopate  and  shall  reduced  to  a  presbyter.  Aristenus,  on  the 
perform  the  functions  of  a  presbyter.  other  handj  C(£side£s  the  deposition   to  be 

real  and  that  this  canon  creates  an  exception 
The  meaning  of  this  canon  is  most  obscure,   to  Canon  XXIX.  of  Chalcedon. 


CANON  XXI. 

Those  who  have  become  guilty  of  crimes  against  the  canons,  and  on  this  account 
subject  to  complete  and  perpetual  deposition,  are  degraded  to  the  condition  of  laymen. 
If,  however,  keeping  conversion  continually  before  their  eyes,  they  willingly  deplore  the 
sin  on  account  of  which  they  fell  from  grace,  and  made  themselves  aliens  therefrom, 
they  may  still  cut  their  hair  after  the  manner  of  clerics.  But  if  they  are  not  willing  to 
submit  themselves  to  this  canon,  they  must  wear  their  hair  as  laymen,  as  being  those 
who  have  preferred  the  communion  of  the  world  to  the  celestial  life. 

'  It  is  not  generally  known  that  this  evident  citation  of  Canon  XIX.  of  the  Quinisext  Council  forms  part  of  the  action  enforcing 
the  XXXIX.  Articles  of  the  Church  of  England. 


376 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXI. 
Whoever  is  already  deposed  and  reduced  to  the 
lay  estate,  if  he  shall  repent,  let  him  continue  de- 
posed but  be  shorn.     But  if  otherwise,  he  must 
let  liis  hair  grow. 


Beveridge  wishes  to  read  who  have  be- 
come canonically  guilty  of  crimes,"  sub- 
stituting KavoviKws  for  KavoviKoU,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  Bodleian  and  Amerbachian 
codices. 


CANON  XXII. 

Those  who  are  ordained  for  money,  whether  bishops  or  of  any  rank  whatever,  and 
not  by  examination  and  choice  of  life,  we  order  to  be  deposed  as  well  as  those  also  who 
ordained  them. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXII. 

Whoever  is  ordained  for  pay  shall  be  deposed 
together  with  his  ordainer. 

Van  Espen. 

The  present  canon  orders  to  be  deposed 
not  only  the  one  simoniacally  ordained,  but 
also  his  ordainer,  ordering  that  ordinations 


should  take  place  on  account,  not  of  money, 
but  of  the  excellence  of  the  examination 
stood  by  the  candidate  and  on  account  of  his 
uprightness  of  life.  And  it  evidently  takes 
it  for  granted  that,  where  money  has  been 
used,  examination,  excellence  of  life,  and 
consideration  of  merit  enter  but  little  into 
the  matter,  or  at  least  are  paid  no  atten- 
tion to. 


CANON  XXIII. 

That  no  one,  whether  bishop,  presbyter,  or  deacon,  when  giving  the  immaculate 
Communion,  shall  exact  from  him  who  communicates  fees  of  any  kind.  For  grace  is 
not  to  be  sold,  nor  do  we  give  the  sanctification  of  the  Holy  Spirit  for  money  ;  but  to 
those  who  are  worthy  of  the  gift  it  is  to  be  communicated  in  all  simplicity.  But  if  any 
of  those  enrolled  among  the  clergy  make  demands  on  those  he  communicates  let  him  be 
deposed,  as  an  imitator  of  the  error  and  wickedness  of  Simon. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XXIII. 


Whoever  shall  demand  an  obolus  or  anything 
else  for  giving  the  spotless  communion  shall  be 
deposed. 


This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars.  II.,  Causa 
I.,  QuEest.  I.,  can.  100,  attributed  to  the  VI. 
Synod.  Ivo  reads,  "From  the  Sixth  Synod, 
III.  Constantinople." 


CANON  XXIV. 

No  one  who  is  on  the  priestly  catalogue  nor  any  monk  is  allowed  to  take  part  in 
horse-races  or  to  assist  at  theatrical  representations.  But  if  any  clergyman  be  called  to 
a  marriage,  as  soon  as  the  games  begin  let  him  rise  up  and  go  out,  for  so  it  is  ordered  by 
the  doctrine  of  our  fathers.  And  if  any  one  shall  be  convicted  of  such  an  offence  let 
him  cease  therefrom  or  be  deposed. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXIV. 
A   clergyman  or  monk  shall  be  deposed  who 
goes   to  horse-races,    or   does  not  leave  nuptials 
before  the  players  are  brought  in. 


Van  Espen. 
Scarcely  ever  were   these  plays  exhibited 
without  the  introduction  of   something  con- 
trary to   honesty   and   chastity.     As   Lupus 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


377 


here  notes,  the  word  "  obscene  "  has  its  deri- 
vation from  these  "  scenic  "  representations. 

Bigktly  therefore  has  it  been  forbidden  by 
the  sacred  canons  that  the  clergy  should  wit- 
ness any  such  plays. 

In  the  second  part  of  this  canon  by  the 
words    "ordered    by    the    doctrine    of    our 


fathers,"  the  Synod  understands  the  doctrine 
of  the  fathers  of  the  synod  of  Laodicea,  which 
in  its  canon  liv.  condemned  the  same  abuse. 

Compare  the  canon  given  in  the  Corpus 
Juris  Canonici,  Gratian's  Dccretum,  Pars  I., 
Dist.  XXXIV.,  can.  xix. 


CANON  XXV. 

Moreover  we  renew  the  canon  which  orders  that  country  (aypoua/cas)  parishes  and 
those  which  are  in  the  provinces  (ey^coplov;)  shall  remain  subject  to  the  bishops  who 
had  possession  of  them  ;  especially  if  for  thirty  years  they  had  administered  them  with- 
out opposition.  But  if  within  thirty  years  there  had  been  or  should  be  any  controversy 
on  the  point,  it  is  lawful  for  those  who  think  themselves  injured  to  refer  the  matter  to 
the  provincial  synod. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XXV. 
Rural  and  out  of  town  parishes  held  for  thirty 
years  may  be  retained.    But  ivithin   that  time 
there  may  be  a  controversy. 


Compare  notes  on  Canon  XVII.  of  Chal- 
cedon. 


CANON  XXVI. 

If  a  presbyter  has  through  ignorance  contracted  an  illegal  marriage,  while  he  still 
retains  the  right  to  his  place,  as  we  have  defined  in  the  sacred  canons,  yet  he  must 
abstain  from  all  sacerdotal  work.  For  it  is  sufficient  if  to  such  an  one  indulgence  is 
granted.  For  he  is  unfit  to  bless  another  who  needs  to  take  care  of  his  own  wounds,  for 
blessing  is  the  imparting  of  sanctification.  But  how  can  he  impart  this  to  another  who 
does  not  possess  it  himself  through  a  sin  of  ignorance  ?  Neither  then  in  public  nor  in 
private  can  he  bless  nor  distribute  to  others  the  body  of  Christ,  [nor  perforin  any  other 
ministry] ;  but  being  content  with  his  seat  of  honour  let  him  lament  to  the  Lord  that 
his  sin  of  ignorance  may  be  remitted.  For  it  is  manifest  that  the  nefarious  marriage 
must  be  dissolved,  neither  can  the  man  have  any  intercourse  with  her  on  account  of 
whom  he  is  deprived  of  the  execution  of  his  priesthood. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXVI. 
A  priest  who  has  fallen  into  an  illicit  mar- 
riage and  been  deposed,  may  still  have  his  scat,  but 
only  when  he  abstains  for  the  future  from,  his 
wickedness. 

Aristenus. 
If  any  presbyter  before  his  ordination  had 
married  a  widow,  or  a  harlot,  or  an  actress, 


ignorance,  he  shall  cease  from  his  priesthood 
but  shall  still  have  his  place  among  the  pres- 
byters. But  such  an  illegitimate  marriage, 
on  account  of  which  he  was  deprived  of  the 
Sacred  Ministry,  must  be  dissolved. 

Van  Espen. 
The  sacred  canon  to  which  the  Synod  here 
refers  is  number   xxvij.   of  St.  Basil   in  his 


or  any  other  woman  such  as  are  forbidden,  in  |  Canonical  Epistle  to  Amphilochius. 


CANON  XXVII. 

None  of  those  who  are  in  the  catalogue  of  the  clergy  shall  wear  clothes  unsuited  to 
them,  either  while  still  living  in  town  or  when  on  a  journey  :  but  they  shall  wear  such 
clothes  as  are  assigned  to  those  who  belong  to  the  clergy.  And  if  any  one  shall  violate 
this  canon,  he  shall  be  cut  off  for  one  week. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXVII. 
A  clergyman  must  not  wear  an  unsuitable  dress  either  ivhcn  travelling  or  when  at  home.    Should 
he  do  so,  he  shall  be  cut  off  for  one  weeh 


378 


QUINISEXT.     A.B.  692 


CANON  XXVIII. 


Since  we  understand  that  in  several  churches  grapes  are  brought  to  the  altar,  accord- 
ing to  a  custom  which  has  long  prevailed,  and  the  ministers  joined  this  with  the  unbloody 
sacrifice  of  the  oblation,  and  distributed  both  to  the  people  at  the  same  time,  we  decree 
that  no  priest  shall  do  this  for  the  future,  but  shall  administer  the  oblation  alone  to  the 
people  for  the  quickening  of  their  souls  and  for  the  remission  of  their  sins.  But  with 
regard  to  the  offering  of  grapes  as  first  fruits,  the  priests  may  bless  them  apart  [from 
the  offering  of  the  oblation]  and  distribute  them  to  such  as  seek  them  as  an  act  of  thanks- 
giving to  him  who  is  the  Giver  of  the  fruits  by  which  our  bodies  are  increased  and  fed 
according  to  his  divine  decree.  And  if  any  cleric  shall  violate  this  decree  let  him  be 
deposed. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXVIII. 

Grapes  are  by  some  joined  with  the  unbloody 
sacrifice.  It  is  hereby  decreed  that  no  one  shall 
for  the  future  dare  to  do  this. 

Van  Espen. 

Similar  blessings  of  fruit,  and  particularly 
of  grapes,  are  found  in  more  recent  rituals  as 
well  as  in  the  ancient  Greek  Euchologions 
and  the  Latin  Rituales.  In  the  Sacramentary 
of  St.  Gregory  will  be  found  a  benediction  of 
grapes  on  the  feast  of  St.  Sixtus. 

Cardinal  Bona  says  (De  Rcb.  IAturg.,  Lib.  II., 
cap.  xiv.),  that  immediately  before  the  words 
Semper  bona  creas,  sanctificas,  etc.,  if  new  fruits 
or  any  other  things  adapted  to  human  use 
were  to  be  blessed,  they  were  wont  in  former 
times  to  be  placed  before  the  altar,  and  there 
to  be  blessed  by  the  priest ;  and  when  the 


benediction  was  ended  with  the  accustomed 
words  "  Through  Christ  our  Lord,"  there  was 
added  the  following  prayer:  "Perquem  hsec 
omnia,  etc.,"  which  words  are  not  so  much  to 
be  referred  to  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  as 
to  the  things  to  be  blessed,  which  God  contin- 
ually creates  by  renewing,  and  we  ask  that 
they  may  be  sanctified  by  his  benediction  to 
our  use. 

But  in  after  ages  when  the  fervour  of  the 
faithful  had  grown  cold,  that  the  mass  might 
not  be  too  long,  they  were  separated  and  yet 
the  prayer  remained  which,  as  said  to-day  over 
the  consecrated  species  alone,  can  hardly  be 
understood. 

This  canon  is  found  in  a  shortened  form 
in  the  Corpus  Juris  Canonici,  Pars.  III.,  De 
Consecrat.,  Dist.  II.,  can.  vj. 

Compare  Canon  of  the  Apostles  number  iv. 


CANON  XXIX. 


A  Canon  of  the  Synod  of  Carthage  says  that  the  holy  m}Tsteries  of  the  altar  are  not 
to  be  performed  but  by  men  who  are  fasting,  except  on  one  day  in  the  year  on  which 
the  Supper  of  the  Lord  is  celebrated.  At  that  time,  on  account  perhaps  of  certain  occa- 
sions in  those  places  useful  to  the  Church,  even  the  holy  Fathers  themselves  made  use 
of  this  dispensation.  But  since  nothing  leads  us  to  abandon  exact  observance,  we  decree 
that  the  Apostolic  and  Patristic  tradition  shall  be  followed ;  and  define  that  it  is  not 
right  to  break  the  fast  on  the  fifth  feria  of  the  last  week  of  Lent,  and  thus  to  do  dishon- 
our to  the  whole  of  Lent. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XXIX. 
Some  of  the  Fathers  after  they  had  supped  on 
the  day  of  the  Divine  Supper  made  the  offering} 
However,  it  has  seemed  good  to  the  synod  that 
this  should  not  be  done,  and  that  the  fast  should 
not  be  broJcen  upon  the  fifth  feria%  of  the  last 


i  I.e.,  of  the 


-  Maundy  Thursday. 


week  of  Lent,  and  so  the  whole  of  Lent  be  dis- 
honoured. 

Zonaras  remarks  that  the  "Apostolic  and 
Patristic  tradition  "  is  a  reference  to  canon 
lxix.  of  the  Apostolic  Canons  and  to  canon  1. 
of  Laodicea.     See  notes  on  this  last  canon. 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


579 


CANON  XXX. 

Willing  to  do  all  things  for  the  edification  of  the  Church,  we  have  determined  to 
take  care  even  of  priests  avIio  are  in  barbarian  churches.  Wherefore  if  they  think  that 
they  ought  to  exceed  the  Apostolic  Canon  concerning  the  not  putting  away  of  a  wife 
on  the  pretext  of  piety  and  religion,  and  to  do  beyond  that  which  is  commanded,  and 
therefore  abstain  by  agreement  with  their  wives  from  cohabitation,  we  decree  they 
ought  no  longer  to  live  with  them  in  any  way,  so  that  hereby  they  may  afford  us  a  per- 
fect demonstration  of  their  promise.  But  we  have  conceded  this  to  them  on  no  other 
ground  than  their  narrowness,  and  foreign  and  unsettled  manners. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XXX. 
Those  priests  rolio  are  in  churches  among  the 
barbarians,  if  with  consent  they  have  abstained 
from  commerce  with  their  wives  shall  never  after- 
wards have  any  commerce  with  them  in  any  way. 

Fleuey. 
(Hist.  Eccl.,  Liv.  XL.,  chap.  1.) 
"  Priests  who  are  among  the  barbarians," 
that  is  to  say,  it  would  seem,  in  Italy  and  in 
the  other  countries  of  the  Latin  rite.  "  Their 
narrowness  and  foreign  and  unsettled  man- 
ners," that  is  to  say  that  according  to  them  it 
is  an  imperfection  to  aspire  after  perfect  con- 
tinence. 


I  do  not  think  that  this  explanation  of 
Fleury's  can  be  sustained,  and  it  would  seem 
that  Van  Espen  is  more  near  the  truth  when 
he  says :  "Some  priests  in  barbarous  coun- 
tries thought  they  should  abstain  after  the 
Latin  custom  even  from  wives  taken  before 
ordination.  And  although  this  ivas  contrary 
to  the  discipline  of  the  Greeks,  and  also  to 
Canon  V.  of  the  Apostles,  nevertheless  the 
Fathers  thought  it  might  be  tolerated,  pro- 
vided such  priests  should  also  not  live  any 
longer  with  their  wives."  There  seems  no 
reason  to  introduce  anti-Roman  bitterness 
where  it  is  not  already  found. 


CANON  XXXI. 

Clerics  who  in  oratories  which  are  in  houses  offer  the  Holy  Mysteries  or  baptize, 
we  decree  ought  to  do  this  with  the  consent  of  the  bishop  of  the  place.  Wherefore  if 
any  cleric  shall  not  have  so  done,  let  him  be  deposed. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XXXI. 
Thou  mayest  not  offer  in  an  oratory  in  a  pri- 
vate house  without  the  consent  of  the  bishop. 


Commentarius  Theologico  -  canonico  -  criti- 
cus  Dc  ccciesiis,  carum  revercntia,  etasylo  atque 
concordia  sacerdotii,  et  imperii,  auctore  Josepho 
I  Aloysio  Assemani.  Accesserunt  tractatus  cl. 
On  this  whole  subject  the  reader  is  referred  virorum  D.  Josephi  de  Bonis,  Dc  Oratoriis 
to  the  curious  and  most  interesting  volume  Publicis  ;  ac.  R  P.  Fortunati  a  Brixia  De  Ora- 
published  by  Venantius  Monaldini  of  Venice,  '  toriis  Domesticis,  in  supplementum  celeberrimi 
in  1765.  I  cannot  better  give  its  scope  than  !  operis  Joannis  Baptistte  Gattico  De  Oratoriis 
by  copying  out  its  title  in  full.  I  Domesticis,  et  usu  altaris  portatilis. 


CANON  XXXII. 

Since  it  has  come  to  our  knowledge  that  in  the  region  of  Armenia  they  offer  wine 
only  on  the  Holy  Table,  those  who  celebrate  the  unbloody  sacrifice  not  mixing  water 
with  it,  adducing,  as  authority  thereof,  John  Chrysostom,  a  doctor  of  the  Church,  who 
says  in  his  interpretation  of  the  Gospel  according  to  St.  Matthew : 

"  And  wherefore  did  he  not  drink  water  after  he  was  risen  again,  but  wine  ?  To 
pluck  up  by  the  roots  another  wicked  heresy.  For  since  there  are  certain  who  use 
water  in  the  Mysteries  to  shew  that  both  when  he  delivered  the  mysteries  he  had  given 
wine  and  that  when  he  had  risen  and  was  setting  before  them  a  mere  meal  without  mys- 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


teries,  he  used  wine,  '  of  the  fruit,'  saith  he, '  of  the  vine.'  But  a  vine  produces  wine, 
not  water." 1  And  from  this  they  think  the  doctor  overthrows  the  admixture  of  water  in 
the  holy  sacrifice.  Now,  lest  on  the  point  from  this  time  forward  they  be  held  in  igno- 
rance, we  open  out  the  orthodox  opinion  of  the  Father.  For  since  there  was  an  ancient 
and  wicked  heresy  of  the  Hydroparastatae  (i.e.,  of  those  who  offered  water),  who  instead 
of  wine  used  water  in  their  sacrifice,  this  divine,  confuting  the  detestable  teaching  of 
such  a  heresy,  and  showing  that  it  is  directly  opposed  to  Apostolic  tradition,  asserted 
that  which  has  just  been  quoted.  For  to  his  own  church,  where  the  pastoral  adminis- 
tration had  been  given  him,  he  ordered  that  water  mixed  with  wine  should  be  used  at  the 
unbloody  sacrifice,  so  as  to  shew  forth  the  mingling  of  the  blood  and  water  which  for 
the  life  of  the  whole  world  and  for  the  redemption  of  its  sins,  was  poured  forth  from 
the  precious  side  of  Christ  our  Redeemer ;  and  moreover  in  every  church  where  spir- 
itual light  has  shined  this  divinely  given  order  is  observed. 

For  also  James,  the  brother,  according  to  the  flesh,  of  Christ  our  God,  to  whom  the 
throne  of  the  church  of  Jerusalem  first  was  entrusted,  and  Basil,  the  Archbishop  of  the 
Church  of  Csesarea,  whose  glory  has  spread  through  all  the  world,  when  they  delivered 
to  us  directions  for  the  mystical  sacrifice  in  writing,  declared  that  the  holy  chalice  is 
consecrated  in  the  Divine  Liturgy  with  water  and  wine.  And  the  holy  Fathers  who  as- 
sembled at  Carthage  provided  in  these  express  terms :  "  That  in  the  holy  Mysteries 
nothing  besides  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord  be  offered,  as  the  Lord  himself  laid 
down,  that  is  bread  and  wine  mixed  with  water."  Therefore  if  any  bishop  or  presbyter 
shall  not  perform  the  holy  action  according  to  what  has  been  handed  down  by  the 
Apostles,  and  shall  not  offer  the  sacrifice  with  wine  mixed  with  water,  let  him  be  deposed, 
as  imperfectly  shewing  forth  the  mystery  and  innovating  on  the  things  which  have  been 
handed  down. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXXII. 
Chrysostom,  when  ovcrthroiving  the  heresy  of 
the  Hydroparastatce,  says :  "  When  the  Lord  suf- 
fered and  rose  again  he  used  wine."  The  Ar- 
menians, laying  hold  on  this,  offer  wine  (done, 
not  understanding  that  Chrysostom  himself,  and 
Basil,  and  James  used  wine  mixed  with  ivater  ; 
and  left  the  tradition  that  we  should  so  make  the 
offering.  If,  therefore,  any  one  shall  offer  wine 
(done,  or  tcater  (done,  and  not  the  mixed  [chalice] 
let  him  be  deposed. 

Van  Espen. 

Justin  Martyr  in  his  Second  Apology,  Am- 
brose, or  whoever  was  the  author  of  the  books 
on  the  Sacraments  (Lib.  v.,  cap.  i.),  Augustine 
and  many  others  make  mention  of  this  rite, 
and  above  all  St.  Cyprian,  who  wrote  a  long 
epistle  on  the  subject  to  Cecilius,  and  seeking 
the  reason  of  the  ceremony  as  a  setting  forth 
of  the  union  of  the  people,  represented  by  the 
water,  with  Christ,  figured  by  the  wine. 

Another  signification  of  this  rite  St.  Au- 
gustine indicates  in  his  sermon  to  Neophytes, 
saying :  "  Take  this  in  bread,  which  hung 
upon  the  Cross :  Take  this  in  the  cup  which 
poured  forth  from  the  side,"  that  is  to  say 
blood  and  water. 

Cardinal  Bona  (Dc  Rebus  Liturgicis,  Lib.  II., 


cap.  ix.,  n.  3  and  4)  refers  to  many  ancient 
rituals  in  which  a  similar  prayer  is  used  to 
that  found  in  the  Ambrosian  rite,  which  says 
as  the  water  is  poured  in  :  "  Out  of  the  side  of 
Christ  there  flowed  forth  blood  and  water  to- 
gether. In  the  name  of  the  Father,  etc." 
Bona  further  notes  that  "  The  Greeks  twice 
mingle  water  with  the  wine,  once  cold  water, 
when  in  the  prothesis  they  are  preparing  the 
Holy  Gifts,  and  the  Priest  pierces  the  bread 
with  the  holy  spear,  and  says,  "One  of  the 
soldiers  with  a  lance  opened  his  side,  and  im- 
mediately there  flowed  forth  blood  and  water," 
and  the  deacon  pours  in  wine  and  water. 
From  this  it  is  evident  that  the  Greeks  agree 
with  St.  Augustine's  explanation. 

For  the  second  time  the  Greeks  mix  "  hot 
water  after  consecration  and  immediately  be- 
fore communion,  the  deacon  begging  from 
the  priest  a  blessing  upon  the  warm  water ; 
and  he  blesses  it  in  these  words  :  '  Blessed  be 
the  fervour  of  thy  Saints,  now  and  ever  and 
to  the  ages  of  ages.  Amen.'  Then  the  dea- 
con pours  the  water  into  the  chalice,  saying : 
'  The  fervour  of  faith,  full  of  the  Holy  Spirit.' " 
So  Cardinal  Bona  as  above. 

The  third  reason  of  this  rite  is  assumed  by 
some  from  the  fact  that  Christ  is  believed 
thus  to  have  instituted  this  sacrament  at  the 


1  Chrysos.    In  Matt.  XXVI.  29—1  have  taken  the  Oxford  translation,  "  Library  of  the  Fathers." 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  693 


381 


last  supper  ;  and  this  the  synod  seems  to  in- 
timate in  the  present  canon   when    it    says 
"as  the  Lord  himself  delivered." 
In  this  case  the  Greeks  suppose  that  this 


rite  was  also  handed  down  by  the  Apostles, 
and  this  is  evident  from  their  citing  the  Lit- 
urgy of  St.  James,  which  they  believed  to  be 
a  genuine  work  of  his. 


CANON  XXXIII. 

Since  we  know  that,  in  the  region  of  the  Armenians,  only  those  are  appointed  to  the 
clerical  orders  who  are  of  priestly  descent  (following  in  this  Jewish  customs) ;  and  some 
of  those  who  are  even  untonsured  are  appointed  to  succeed  cantors  and  readers  of  the 
divine  law,  we  decree  that  henceforth  it  shall  not  be  lawful  for  those  who  wish  to  bring 
any  one  into  the  clergy,  to  pay  regard  to  the  descent  of  him  who  is  to  be  ordained ;  but 
let_them  examine  whether  they  are  worthy  (according  to  the  decrees  set  forth  in  the  holy 
canons)  to  be  placed  on  the  list  of  the  clergy,  so  that  they  may  be  ecclesiastically  pro- 
moted, whether  they  are  of  priestly  descent  or  not ;  moreover,  let  them  not  permit  any 
one  at  all  to  read  in  the  ambo,  according  to  the  order  of  those  enrolled  in  the  clergy,  un- 
less such  an  one  have  received  the  priestly  tonsure  and  the  canonical  benediction  of  his 
own  pastor ;  but  if  any  one  shall  have  been  observed  to  act  contrary  to  these  directions, 
let  him  be  cut  off. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XXXIII. 

Wlioever  is  worthy  of  the  priesthood  should 
be  ordained  whether  he  is  sprung  of  a  priestly 
line  or  no.  And  he  that  has  been  blessed  unton- 
sured shall  not  read  the  Holy  Scriptures  at  the 
ambo. 


Van  Espen. 
Here  not  obscurely  does  the  canon  join  the 
clerical  tonsure  received  from  the  bishop  with 
the  office  of  Reader,  so  much  so  that  he  that 
has  been  tonsured  by  the  bishop  is  thought 
to  have  received  at  the  same  time  the  tonsure 
and  the  order  of  lector. 


CANON  XXXIV. 

But  in  future,  since  the  priestly  canon  openly  sets  this  forth,  that  the  crime  of  con- 
spiracy or  secret  society  is  forbidden  by  external  laws,  but  much  more  ought  it  to  be  pro- 
hibited in  the  Church ;  we  also  hasten  to  observe  that  if  any  clerics  or  monks  are  found 
either  conspiring  or  entering  secret  societies,  or  devising  anything  against  bishops  or 
clergymen,  they  shall  be  altogether  deprived  of  their  rank. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXXIV. 
If  clerics  or  monies  enter  into  conspiracies  or 
fraternities,  or  plots  against  the  bishop  or  their 
fellow  clerics,  they  shall  be  cast  out  of  their  grade. 


This  is  but  a  renewal  of  Canon  xviij. 
Chalcedon,  which  see  with  the  notes. 


of 


CANON  XXXV. 

It  shall  be  lawful  for  no  Metropolitan  on  the  death  of  a  bishop  of  his  province  to  ap- 
propriate or  sell  the  private  property  of  the  deceased,  or  that  of  the  widowed  church  : 
but  these  are  to  be  in  the  custody  of  the  clergy  of  the  diocese  over  which  he  presided 
until  the  election  of  another  bishop,  unless  in  the  said  church  there  are  no  clergymen 
left.  For  then  the  Metropolitan  shall  protect  the  property  without  diminution,  handing 
over  everything  to  the  bishop  when  he  is  appointed. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXXV. 


Wlien    the   bishop  is  dead  the  clergy  shall 


guard  his  goods.  If,  however,  no  clergyman 
remains,  the  Metropolitan  shall  take  charge  of 
them  until  another  be  ordained. 


382 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


Compare  Canon  xxii.  of  Chalcedon.  This 
canon  extends  the  prohibition  to  Metropoli- 
tans as  well. 

Aeistenus. 

Neither  the  clergy  nor  metropolitan  after 
the  death  of  the  bishop  arc  allowed  to  carry 


off  his  goods,  but  all  should  be  guarded  by 
the  clergy  themselves,  until  another  bishop  is 
chosen.  But  if  by  chance  no  clergyman  is 
left  in  that  church,  the  metropolitan  is  to  keep 
all  the  possessions  undiminished  and  to  return 
them  to  the  future  bishop. 


CANON   XXXVI. 

Renewing  the  enactments  by  the  150  Fathers  assembled  at  the  God-protected  and 
imperial  city,  and  those  of  the  630  who  met  at  Chalcedon ;  we  decree  that  the  see  of 
Constantinople  shall  have  equal  privileges  with  the  see  of  Old  Rome,  and  shall  be  highly 
regarded  in  ecclesiastical  matters  as  that  is,  and  shall  be  second  after  it.  After  Con- 
stantinople shall  be  ranked  the  See  of  Alexandria,  then  that  of  Antioch,  and  afterwards 
the  See  of  Jerusalem. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXXVI. 


Let  the  throne  of  Constantinople  be  next  after 
that  of  Borne,  and  enjoy  equal  privileges.  After 
it  Alexandria,  then  Antioch,  and  then  Jerusalem. 

Balsamon. 

The  Fathers  here  speak  of  the  Second  and 
Third  canons  of  the  Second  Synod  [i.e.  I.  Con- 
stantinople] and  of  canon  xxviij.  of  the  Fourth 
Synod  [i.e.  Chalcedon].  And  read  what  we 
have  said  on  these  canons. 

Aeistenus. 

We  have  explained  the  third  canon  of  the 
Synod  of  Constantinople  and  the  twenty-eighth 
canon  of  the  Synod  of  Chalcedon  as  meaning, 
when  asserting  that  the  bishop  of  Constanti- 
nople should  enjoy  equal  privileges  after  the 
Roman  bishop,  that  he  should  be  placed  sec- 
ond from  the  Roman  in  point  of  time.  So 
hex-e   too   this  preposition    "after"   denotes 


time  but  not  honour.  For  after  many  years 
this  throne  of  Constantinople  obtained  equal 
privileges  with  the  Roman  Church ;  because 
it  was  honoured  by  the  presence  of  the  Em- 
peror and  of  the  Senate. 

On  this  opinion  of  Aristenus's  the  reader 
is  referred  to  the  notes  on  Canon  iij.  of  I. 
Constantinople. 

Justinian. 
{Novella  CXXXI.,  Gap.  ij.) 
We  command  that  according  to  the  defini- 
tions of  the  Four  Councils  the  most  holy  Pope 
of  Old  Rome  shall  be  first  of  all  the  priests. 
But  the  most  blessed  Archbishop  of  Constan- 
tinople, which  is  New  Rome,  shall  have  the 
second  place  after  the  Holy  Apostolic  See  of 
Old  Rome. 

This  canon,  in  a  mutilated  form,  is  found 
in  the  Corpus  Juris  Canonici,  Gratian's  Decre- 
titii),' Pars,  I.,  Dist.  XXII.,  c.  vj. 


CANON  XXXVII. 

Since  at  different  times  there  have  been  invasions  of  barbarians,  and  therefore  very 
many  cities  have  been  subjected  to  the  infidels,  so  that  the  bishop  of  a  city  may  not  be 
able,  after  he  has  been  ordained,  to  take  possession  of  his  see,  and  to  be  settled  in  it  in 
sacerdotal  order,  and  so  to  perform  and  manage  for  it  the  ordinations  and  all  things 
which  by  custom  appertain  to  the  bishop  :  we,  preserving  honour  and  veneration  for  the 
priesthood,  and  in  no  wise  wishing  to  employ  the  Gentile  injury  to  the  ruin  of  eccle- 
siastical rights,  have  decreed  that  those  who  have  been  ordained  thus,  and  on  account 
of  the  aforesaid  cause  have  not  been  settled  in  their  sees,  without  any  prejudice  from  this 
thing  may  be  kept  [in  good  standing]  and  that  they  may  canonically  perform  the  ordi- 
nation of  the  different  clerics  and  use  the  authority  of  their  office  according  to  the  defined 
limits,  and  that  whatever  administration  proceeds  from  them  may  be  valid  and  legiti- 
mate. For  the  exercise  of  his  office  shall  not  be  circumscribed  by  a  season  of  neces- 
sity when  the  exact  observance  of  law  is  circumscribed. 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


383 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXXVII. 

A  bishop  loho,  on  account  of  the  incursions  of 
the  barbarians,  is  not  set  in  his  throne,  shall  have 
his  own  chair  of  state,  and  shall  ordain,  and 
shall  enjoy  most  firmly  all  the  rights  of  the 
priesthood. 

By  Canon  XVIII.  of  Antioch  the  principle 
of  this  canon  was  enunciated,  that  when  a 


bishop  did  not  take  possession  of  his  see  be- 
cause he  could  not  do  so,  he  was  not  to  be 
held  responsible  or  to  lose  any  of  his  episco- 
pal rights  and  powers,  in  that  case  the  impos- 
sibility arose  from  the  insubordination  of  the 
people,  in  this  from  the  diocese  being  in  the 
hands  of  the  barbarians. 

It  has  been  commonly  thought  that  the 
Bishops  in  partibus  ivtfidelium  had  their  origin 
in  the  state  of  thing's  calling  for  this  canon. 


CANON  XXXVIII. 

The  canon  which  was  made  by  the  Fathers  we  also  observe,  which  thus  decreed : 
If  any  city  be  renewed  by  imperial  authority,  or  shall  have  been  renewed,  let  the  order 
of  things  ecclesiastical  follow  the  civil  and  public  models. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXXVIII. 

If  any  city  is  or  shall  be  renewed  by  the 
Emperor,  the  ecclesiastical  order  shall  follow 
the  political  and  public  example. 

Van  Espen. 
The  canon  of  the  Fathers  which  the  Synod 


wishes  observed  is  XVII  of  Chalcedon,  the 
notes  on  which  see. 

Here  it  must  be  noted  that  by  "civil  and 
public  models  "  is  signified  the  "  pragmatic  " 
or  imperial  letters,  by  winch  the  emperors 
granted  to  newly  raised  up  or  re-edified  towns 
the  privilege  of  other  cities,  or  else  annexed 
them  to  some  Province. 


CANON  XXXIX. 

Since  our  brother  and  fellow-worker,  John,  bishop  of  the  island  of  Cyprus,  together 
with  his  people  in  the  province  of  the  Hellespont,  both  on  account  of  barbarian  incur- 
sions, and  that  they  may  be  freed  from  servitude  of  the  heathen,  and  may  be  subject 
alone  to  the  sceptres  of  most  Christian  rule,  have  emigrated  from  the  said  island,  by 
the  providence  of  the  philanthropic  God,  and  the  labour  of  our  Christ-loving  and  pious 
Empress  ;  Ave  determine  that  the  privileges  which  were  conceded  by  the  divine  fathers 
who  first  at  Ephesus  assembled,  are  to  be  preserved  without  any  innovations,  viz. :  that 
new  Justinianopolis  shall  have  the  rights  of  Constantinople  and  whoever  is  constituted  the 
pious  and  most  religious  bishop  thereof  shall  take  precedence  of  all  the  bishops  of  the 
province  of  the  Hellespont,  and  be  elected  [?]  by  his  own  bishops  according  to  ancient 
custom.  For  the  customs  which  obtain  in  each  church  our  divine  Fathers  also  took  pains 
should  be  maintained,  the  existing  bishop  of  the  city  of  Cyzicus  being  subject  to  the  met- 
ropolitan of  the  aforesaid  Justinianopolis,  for  the  imitation  of  all  the  rest  of  the  bishops 
who  are  under  the  aforesaid  beloved  of  God  metropolitan  John,  by  whom,  as  custom 
demands,  even  the  bishop  of  the  very  city  of  Cyzicus  shall  be  ordained. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXXIX. 


The  new  Justinianopolis  shall  have  the  rights  of 
Constantinople,  and  its  prelate  shall  rule  over  all 
the  bishops  of  the  Hellespont  to  whom  he  has  gone, 
and  he  shall  be  ordained  by  his  own  bishop :  as 
the  fathers  of  Ephesus  decreed. 


Hefele. 


Hitherto  the  bishop  of  Cyzicus  was  met- 
ropolitan of  the  province  of  the  Hellespont. 
Now  he  too  is  to  be  subject  to  the  bishop  of 
New- Justinianopolis.  What,  however,  is  meant 
by   "the  right  of  Constantinople"?     It  was 


384 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


impossible  that  the  Synod  should  place  the 
bishop  of  Justinianopolis  in  equal  dignity 
with  the  patriarch  of  Constantinople.  But 
they  probably  meant  to  say :  "  The  rights 
which  the  bishop  of  Constantinople  has  hith- 
erto exercised  over  the  province  of  the  Helles- 
pont, as  chief  metropolitan,  fall  now  to  the 
bishop  of  New- Justinianopolis."  Or  perhaps 
we  should  read,  instead  of  ConstantinojDle 
KitiV0T<ivTLve.u>v  7!-oA.ea)s,  as  the  Amerbachian  MS. 
has  it,  and  translate  :  "  The  same  rights  which 


Constantia  (the  metropolis  of  Cyprus)  pos- 
sessed, New  Justinianopolis  shall  henceforth 
have."    The  latter  is  the  more  probable. 

Van  Espen. 

To  understand  this  canon  it  must  be  re- 
membered that  the  Metropolis  of  Cyprus, 
which  was  formerly  called  Constantia,  when 
restored  by  the  Emperor  Justinian  was  called 
by  his  name,  New  Justinianopolis. 


CANON   XL. 

Since  to  cleave  to  God  by  retiring  from  the  noise  and  turmoil  of  life  is  very  benefi- 
cial, it  behoves  us  not  without  examination  to  admit  before  the  proper  time  those  who 
choose  the  monastic  life,  but  to  observe  respecting  them  the  limit  handed  down  by  our 
fathers,  in  order  that  we  may  then  admit  a  profession  of  the  life  according  to  God  as 
for  ever  firm,  and  the  result  of  knowledge  and  judgment  after  years  of  discretion  have 
been  reached.  He  therefore  who  is  about  to  submit  to  the  yoke  of  monastic  life  should 
not  be  less  than  ten  years  of  age,  the  examination  of  the  matter  depending  on  the  de- 
cision of  the  bishop,  whether  he  considers  a  longer  time  more  conducive  for  his  entrance 
and  establishment  in  the  monastic  life.  For  although  the  great  Basil  in  his  holy  canons 
decreed  that  she  who  willingly  offers  to  God  and  embraces  virginity,  if  she  has  com- 
pleted her  seventeenth  year,  is  to  be  entered  in  the  order  of  virgins  :  nevertheless,  hav- 
ing followed  the  example  respecting  widows  and  deaconesses,  analogy  and  proportion 
being  considered,  we  have  admitted  at  the  said  time  those  who  have  chosen  the  monas- 
tic life.  For  it  is  written  in  the  divine  Apostle  that  a  widow  is  to  be  elected  in  the 
church  at  sixty  years  old :  but  the  sacred  canons  have  decreed  that  a  deaconess  shall  be 
ordained  at  forty,  since  they  saw  that  the  Church  by  divine  grace  had  gone  forth  more 
powerful  and  robust  and  was  advancing  still  further,  and  they  saw  the  firmness  and  sta- 
bility of  the  faithful  in  observing  the  divine  commandments.  Wherefore  we  also,  since 
we  most  rightly  comprehend  the  matter,  appoint  the  benediction  of  grace  to  him  who  is 
about  to  enter  the  struggle  according  to  God,  even  as  impressing  speedily  a  certain  seal 
upon  him,  hereupon  introducing  him  to  the  not-long-to-be-hesitated-ovev  and  declined, 
or  rather  inciting  him  even  to  the  choice  and  determination  of  good. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  or  Canon  XL. 
A  monk  must  be  ten  years  old.  Even  if  the 
Divine  Basil  thought  the  one  shorn  should  be 
over  seventeen.  But  although  the  Apostle  or- 
dains that  a  widow  to  be  espoused  to  the  Church 
must  be  sixty,  yet  the  Fathers  say  a  Deaconess 
is  to  be  ordained  at  forty,  the  Church  in  the 
meanwhile  having  become  stronger  ;  so  we  place 
the  seal  on  a  monk  at  an  earlier  age. 

Aeistenus. 
The  eighteenth  canon  of  Basil  the  Great 
orders  that  she  who  offers  herself  to  the  Lord 
and  renounces  marriage,  ought  to  be  over  six- 
teen or  even  seventeen  years  of  age  :  so  that 
her  promise  may  be  firm  and  that  if  she  vio- 
lates it  she  may  suffer  the  due  penalties.  For, 
says  he,  children's  voices  are  not  to  be  thought 
of  any  value  in  such  matters.     But  the  pres- 


ent canon  admits  him  who  is  not  less  than 
ten  years  and  desires  to  be  a  monk,  but  en- 
trusts the  determination  of  the  exact  time  to 
the  judgment  of  the  hegumenos,  whether  he 
thinks  it  more  advantageous  to  increase  the 
age-requirement  for  the  entering  and  being 
established  in  the  married  life.  But  the  can- 
on lessens  the  time  denned  by  Basil  the 
Great,  because  the  Fathers  thought  that  the 
Church  by  divine  grace  had  grown  stronger 
since  then,  and  was  going  on  more  and  more, 
and  that  the  faithful  seemed  firmer  and  more 
stable  for  the  observance  of  the  divine  com- 
mandments. And  for  the  same  reason,  viz., 
that  the  Church  was  growing  better,  the  sacred 
canons  had  lessened  the  age  of  deaconesses, 
and  fixed  it  at  forty  years,  although  the  Apos- 
tle himself  orders  that  no  widow  is  to  be  chos- 
en into  the  Church  under  sixty  years  of  age. 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


385 


CANON  XLL 

Those  who  in  town  or  in  villages  wisli  to  go  away  into  cloisters,  and  take  heed  for 
themselves  apart,  before  they  enter  a  monastery  and  practise  the  anchorite's  life,1  should 
for  the  space  of  three  years  in  the  fear  of  God  submit  to  the  Superior  of  the  house,  and 
fulfil  obedience  in  all  things,  as  is  right,  thus  shewing  forth  their  choice  of  this  life  and 
that  they  embrace  it  willingly  and  with  their  whole  hearts ;  they  are  then  to  be  exam- 
ined by  the  superior  (7rpoeSpo?)  of  the  j)lace  ;  and  then  to  bear  bravely  outside  the  clois- 
ter one  year  more,  so  that  their  purpose  may  be  fully  manifested.  For  by  this  they 
will  shew  fully  and  perfectly  that  they  are  not  catching  at  vain  glory,  but  that  they  are 
pursuing  the  life  of  solitude  because  of  its  inherent  beauty  and  honour.  After  the  com- 
pletion of  such  a  period,  if  they  remain  in  the  same  intention  in  their  choice  of  the  life, 
they  are  to  be  enclosed,  and  no  longer  is  it  lawful  for  them  to  go  out  of  such  a  house 
when  they  so  desire,  unless  they  be  induced  to  do  so  for  the  common  advantage,  or 
other  pressing  necessity  urging  on  to  death ;  and  then  only  with  the  blessing  of  the 
bishop  of  that  place. 

And  those  who,  without  the  above-mentioned  causes,  venture  forth  of  their  convents, 
are  first  of  all  to  be  shut  up  in  the  said  convent  even  against  their  wills,  and  then  are  to 
cure  themselves  with  fasting  and  other  afflictions,  knowing  how  it  is  written  that  "  no 
one  who  has  put  his  hand  to  the  plough  and  has  looked  back,  is  fit  for  the  kingdom  of 
heaven." 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XLI. 


Whoever  is  about  to  enter  a  cloister,  let  him 
live  for  three  years  in  a  monastery,  and  before 
he  is  shut  up  let  him  spend  one  year  more,  and 
so  let  him  be  shut  up.  And  he  shall  not  then 
go  forth  unless  death  or  the  common  good  de- 
mands. 

Van  Espen. 

This  canon,  so  far  as  it  sets  forth  the  ne- 
cessity of  probation  before  admission  to  the 


Anchorite  life,  synods  in  after-years  frequent- 
ly approved,  taught  as  they  were  by  experi- 
ence how  perilous  a  matter  it  is  to  admit  with- 
out sufficient  probation  to  this  solitary  life  and 
state  of  separation  from  the  common  inter- 
course with  his  fellow  men.  Vide  the  Synod 
of  Vannes  (about  a.d.  465)  canon  vij.,  of  Agde 
chap,  lxxviij.,  of  Orleans  the  First  can.  xxij., 
of  Frankfort  can.  xij.,  of  Toledo  the  Seventh 
can.  v.,  and  the  Capitular  of  Charlemagne  To 
monks,  Chap.  ij. 


CANON  XLII. 

Those  who  are  called  Eremites  and  are  clothed  in  black  robes,  and  with  long  hair 
go  about  cities  and  associate  with  the  worldly  both  men  and  women  and  bring  odium 
upon  their  profession — we  decree  that  if  they  will  receive  the  habit  of  other  monks  and 
wear  their  hair  cut  short,  they  may  be  shut  up  in  a  monastery  and  numbered  among  the 
brothers ;  but  if  they  do  not  choose  to  do  this,  they  are  to  be  expelled  from  the  cities 
and  forced  to  live  in  the  desert  (iprmovs)  from  whence  also  they  derive  their  name. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XLII. 
An  eremite  dressed  in  black  vesture  and  not 
having  his  hair  cut,  unless  he  has  his  Mir  cut 
shall  be  expelled  the  city  and  be  shut  up  in  his 
monastery. 

It  may  not  be  irreverent  to  remark  that 
this   species  of  impostors   always   has   been 


common  in  the  East,  and  many  examples  will 
be  found  of  the  dervishes  in  the  Arabian 
Nights  and  other  Eastern  tales.  The  "vaga- 
bond "  monks  of  the  West  also  became  a  great 
nuisance  as  well  as  a  scandal  in  the  Middle 
Ages.  The  reader  will  find  interesting  in- 
stances of  Spanish  deceivers  of  the  same  sort 
in  "  Gil  Bias  "  and  other  Spanish  romances. 


VOL.    XI V. 


1  The  Latin  adds,  "  That  is,  separate  and  remote  from  others,' 
C  C 


386 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  G92 


CANON  XLIII. 

It  is  lawful  for  every  Christian  to  choose  the  life  of  religious  discipline,  and  setting 
aside  the  troublous  surgings  of  the  affairs  of  this  life  to  enter  a  monastery,  and  to  be 
shaven  in  the  fashion  of  a  monk,  without  regard  to  what  faults  he  may  have  previously 
committed.  For  God  our  Saviour  says  :  "  Whoso  cometh  to  me,  I  will  in  no  wise 
cast  out." 

As  therefore  the  monastic  method  of  life  engraves  upon  us  as  on  a  tablet  the  life  of 
penitence,  we  receive1  whoever  approaches  it3  sincerely;  nor  is  any  custom  to  be 
allowed  to  hinder  him  from  fulfilling  his  intention. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XLIII. 


IVJtoevcr  flees  from  the  surging  billows  of  life 
and  desires  to  enter  a  monastery,  shall  he  allowed 
to  do  so. 

Zonaras. 

The  greatness  or  the  number  of  a  man's 
sins  ought  not  to  make  him  lose  hope  of 
propitiating  the  divinity  by  his  penitence,  if 


he  turns  his  eyes  to  the  divine  mercy.  This 
is  what  the  canon  assejts,  and  affirms  that 
everyone,  no  matter  how  wicked  and  nefari- 
ous his  life  may  have  been,  may  embrace 
monastic  discipline,  which  inscribes,  as  on  a 
tablet,3  to  us  a  life  of  penitence.  For  as  a 
tablet  describes  to  us  what  is  inscribed  upon 
it,  so  the  monastic  profession  writes  and 
inscribes  upon  us  penitence,  so  that  it 
remains  for  ever. 


CANON  XLIV. 

A  monk  convicted  of  fornication,  or  who  takes  a  wife  for  the  communion  of  matri- 
mony and  for  society,  is  to  be  subjected  to  the  penalties  of  fornicators,  according  to  the 
canons. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  or  Canon  XLIV. 
A  monk  joined  in  marriage  or  committing  for- 
nication shall  pay  the  penalty  of  a  fornicator. 

The  punishment  here  seems  too  light, 
so  that  Balsamon  thinks  that  this  canon  only 
refers  to  such  monks  as  freely  confess  their 
sin  and  desist  from  it,  remaining  in  their 
monasteries ;  and  that  the  sterner  penalties 
assigned  to  unchaste  religious  by  other  synods 
(notably  Chalcedon,  can.  xvj.,  and  Ancyra, 
can.  xix.)  are  for  such  as  do  not  confess  their 
faults  but  are  after  some  time  convicted  of 
them. 


Aeistenus. 
The  monk  will  receive  the  same  punish- 
ment whether    he  be    a  fornicator   or  has 
joined  himself  with  a  woman  for  the  commun- 
ion of  marriage. 

Van  Espen. 
It  is  very  likely  from  this  canon  that  the 
Monastic  vow  at  the  time  of  this  Synod  was 
not  yet  an  impedimentum  dirimens  of  matri- 
mony, for  nothing  is  said  about  the  dissolu- 
tion of  the  marriage  contracted  by  a  monk 
although  he  had  gravely  sinned  in  violating 
his  faith  pledged  to  God. 


CANON  XLV. 

Whereas  we  understand  that  in  some  monasteries  of  women  those  who  are  about 
to  be  clothed  with  the  sacred  habit  are  first  adorned  in  silks  and  garments  of  all  kinds, 
and  also  with  gold  and  jewels,  by  those  who  bring  them  thither,  and  that  they  thus 
approach  the  altar  and  are  there  stripped  of  such  a  display  of  wealth,  and  that  imme- 
diately thereafter  the  blessing  of  their  habit  takes  place,  and  they  are  clothed  with  the 
black  robe  ;  we  decree  that  henceforth  this  shall  not  be  done. 

For  it  is  not  lawful  for  her  who  has  already  of  her  own  free  will  put  away  every 


1  Latin  adds  ' 
a  Latin  reads; 


and  favour." 

"  germanely  and  sincerely." 


3  Beveridge  translates  otu'Ajj  by  columna  but  I  think  incor- 
rectly.   Cf.  Liddell  and  Scott. 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


387 


delight  of  life,  and  has  embraced  that  method  of  life  which  is  according  to  God,  and 
has  confirmed  it  with  strong  and  stable  reasons,  and  so  has  come  to  the  monastery,  to 
recall  to  memory  the  things  which  they  had  already  forgotten,  things  of  this  world 
which  perisheth  and  passeth  away.  For  thus  they  raise  in  themselves  doubts,  and  are 
disturbed  in  their  souls,  like  the  tossing  waves,  turning  hither  and  thither.  Moreover, 
they  should  not  give  bodily  evidence  of  heaviness  of  heart  by  weeping,  but  if  a  few 
tears  drop  from  their  eyes,  as  is  like  enough  to  be  the  case,  they  may  be  supposed  by 
those  who  see  them  to  have  flowed  firj  /xaXKov  on  account  of  their  affection  (foaSeaecos, 
affectionem)  for  the  ascetic  struggle  rather  than  (rj)  because  they  are  quitting  the  world 
and  worldly  things. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XLV. 

Parents  shall  not  deck  out  in  silks  a  daughter 
who  has  chosen  the  monastic  life,  and  thus  clothe 


her,  for  this  is  a  recalling  to  her  mind  the  world 
she  is  leaving. 

This  canon  is  at  the  present  day  constantly 
broken  at  the  profession  of  Carmelites. 


CANON  XL VI. 

Those  women  who  choose  the  ascetic  life  and  are  settled  in  monasteries  may  by  no 
means  go  forth  of  them.  If,  however,  any  inexorable  necessity  compels  them,  let  them 
do  so  with  the  blessing  and  permission  of  her  who  is  mother  superior ;  and  even  then 
they  must  not  go  forth  alone,  but  with  some  old  women  who  are  eminent  in  the  monas- 
tery, and  at  the  command  of  the  lady  superior.  But  it  is  not  at  all  permitted  that  they 
should  stop  outside. 

And  men  also  who  follow  the  monastic  life  let  them  on  urgent  necessity  go  forth 
with  the  blessing  of  him  to  whom  the  rule  is  entrusted. 

Wherefore,  those  who  transgress  that  which  is  now  decreed  by  us,  whether  they  be 
men  or  women,  are  to  be  subjected  to  suitable  punishments. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XLVI. 
A  nun  shall  not  go  out  of  her  convent  without 
the  consent  of  her  superior,  nor  shall  she  go 
alone  but  with  an  older  one  of  the  order.     It  is 


in  no  case  permitted  to  her  to  spend  the  night 
outside.  The  same  is  the  case  with  a  monk ;  he 
cannot  go  out  of  the  monastery  without  the  con' 
sent  of  the  superior. 


CANON  XL VII. 

No  woman  may  sleep  in  a  monastery  of  men,  nor  any  man  in  a  monastery  of 
women.  For  it  behoves  the  faithful  to  be  without  offence  and  to  give  no  scandal,  and 
to  order  their  lives  decorously  and  honestly  and  acceptably  to  God.  But  if  any  one 
shall  have  done  this,  whether  he  be  cleric  or  layman,  let  him  be  cut  off. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XLVII. 
It  is  not  allowed  that  a  ivoman  should  sleep  in 
a  convent  of  men,  nor  a  man  in  a  monaster}/  of 
women. 

The  ground  covered  by  this  canon  is  also 
found  in  Justinian's  Code,  Book  xliv.,  Of 
Bishops  and  Clergy.  Vide  also  Novella  cxxxiii., 
chap.  v. 

Van  Espen. 

From  the  whole  context  of  Justinian's  law 


it  is  manifest  that  Justinian  here  is  con- 
demning "double  monasteries,"  in  which 
both  men  and  women  dwelt.  And  he  wishes 
such  to  be  separated,  the  men  from  the 
women,  and  e  contra  the  women  from  the 
men,  and  that  each  should  dwell  in  separate 
monasteries. 

The  reader  may  be  reminded  of  some  cu- 
rious double  religious  houses  in  England  for 
men  and  women,  of  which  sometimes  a  woman 
was  the  superior  of  both. 


c  c  2 


388 


QTTINISEXT.     A.D.  693 


CANON  XL VIII. 

The  wife  of  hini  who  is  advanced  to  the  Episcopal  dignity,  shall  be  separated  from 
her  husband  by  their  mutual  consent,  and  after  his  ordination  and  consecration  to  the 
episcopate  she  shall  enter  a  monastery  situated  at  a  distance  from  the  abode  of  the 
bishop,  and  there  let  her  enjoy  the  bishop's  provision.  And  if  she  is  deemed  worthy 
she  may  be  advanced  to  the  dignity  of  a  deaconess. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XL VIII. 
She'jioho  is  separated  from  one  about  to  be 
consecrated  bishop,  shall  enter  a  monastery  after 


his  ordination,  situated  at  a  distance  from  the 
See  city,  and  she  shall  be  provided  for  by  the 

bishop. 


CANON  XLIX. 

Renewing-  also  the  holy  canon,  we  decree  that  the  monasteries  which  have  been  once 
consecrated  by  the  Episcopal  will,  are  always  to  remain  monasteries,  and  the  things 
which  belong  to  them  are  to  be  preserved  to  the  monastery,  and  they  cannot  any  more 
be  secular  abodes  nor  be  given  by  any  one  to  seculars.  But  if  anything  of  this  kind 
has  been  done  already,  we  declare  it  to  be  null ;  and  those  who  hereafter  attempt  to  do 
so  are  to  be  subjected  to  canonical  penalties. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XLIX. 
Monasteries  built  with  the  consent  of  the  bishop 
shall  not  afterwards  be  turned  into  secular  houses, 
nor  shall  they  pass  into  the  hands  of  seculars. 

Van  Espen. 
This  canon  renews  canon  xxiv.  of  Chalce- 
don.     And  here  it  may  be  observed  that  the 
canons  even  of  Ecumenical  Synods  fall  into 


desuetude  little  by  little,  unless  the  care  of 
bishops  and  pastors  keeps  them  alive,  and 
from  the  example  of  this  synod  it  may  be  seen 
how  often  they  need  calling  back  again  into 
observance. 

Nor  can  there  be  any  doubt  that  frequently 
it  would  be  more  advantageous  to  renew  the 
canons  already  set  forth  by  the  Fathers,  rather 
than  to  frame  new  ones. 


CANON  L. 

No  one  at  all,  whether  cleric  or  layman,  is  from  this  time  forward  to  play  at  dice. 
And  if  any  one  hereafter  shall  be  found  doing  so,  if  he  be  a  cleric  he  is  to  be  deposed, 
if  a  layman  let  him  be  cut  off. 

NOTES. 

This  renews  canons  xlii.  and  xliij.  of  the 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  L. 
A  layman  should  not  play  at  dice. 


Apostolic  canons. 


CANON  LI. 

This  holy  and  ecumenical  synod  altogether  forbids  those  who  are  called  "  players," 
and  their  "  spectacles,"  as  well  as  the  exhibition  of  hunts,  and  the  theatrical  dances.  If 
any  one  despises  the  present  canon,  and  gives  himself  to  any  of  the  things  which  are 
forbidden,  if  he  be  a  cleric  he  shall  be  deposed,  but  if  a  layman  let  him  be  cut  off. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  LI. 
Whoso  shall  play  as  an  actor  or  shall  attend 
theatrical  representations  or  hunts  shall  be  cut 
of.     Should  he  be  a  cleric  he  shall  be  deposed. 


Baesamon. 
Some  one  will  enquire  why  canon  xxiiij. 
decrees  that  those  in  holy  orders  and  monks, 
who  are  constantly  attending  horse-races,  and 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  092 


389 


scenic  plays,  are  to  cease  or  be  deposed  :  but 
the  present  canon  says  'without  discrimina- 
tion, that  those  who  give  themselves  over  to 
such  things  if  clergymen  are  to  be  deposed, 
and  if  laymen  to  be  cut  off.  The  solution  is 
this.  It  is  one  thing  and  more  easily  to  be 
endured,  that  a  man  should  be  present  at  a 
horse-race,  or  be  convicted  of  going  to  see  a 
play ;  and  another  thing,  and  one  that  cannot 


be  pardoned,  that  he  should  give  himself  over 
to  such  things,  and  to  exercise  this  continu- 
ally as  his  business.  Wherefore  those  who 
have  once  sinned  deliberately,  are  admonished 
to  cease.  If  they  are  not  willing  to  obey,  they 
are  to  be  deposed.  But  those  who  are  con- 
stantly engaged  in  this  wickedness,  if  they 
are  clerics,  they  must  be  deposed  from  their 
clerical  place,  if  laymen  they  must  be  cut  off. 


CANON   LII. 

On  all  days  of  the  holy  fast  of  Lent,  except  on  the  Sabbath,  the  Lords  day  and  the 
holy  day  of  the  Annunciation,  the  Liturgy  of  the  Presanctified  is  to  be  said. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LII. 


Throughout  the  whole  of  Lent  except  upon  the 
Lord's  day,  the  Sabbath,  and  upon  the  day  of 
the  Annunciation,  the  presanctified  gifts  shall  be 
offered. 

Balsamon. 

We  do  not  call  the  service  of  the  Presancti- 
fied the  unbloody  sacrifice,  but  the  offering 
of  the  previously  offered,  and  of  the  perfected 
sacrifice,  and  of  the  completed  priestly  act. 

Van  Espen. 

The  Greeks  therefore  confess  that  the 
bread  once  offered  and  consecrated,  is  not  to 
be  consecrated  anew  on  another  day  ;  but  a 
new  offering  is  made  of  what  was  before  con- 
secrated and  presanctified :  just  as  in  the 
Latin  Church  the  consecrated  or  presanctified 
bread  of  Maundy  Thursday  is  offered  on 
Good  Friday. 

The  Patriarch  Michael  of  Constantinople  is 
quoted  by  Leo  Allatius  as  saying  that  "  none 
of  the  mystic  consecratory  prayers  are  said 
over  the  presanctified  gifts,  but  the  priest 
only  recites  the  prayer  that  he  may  be  a 
worthy  communicant." 

Some  among  the  later  Greeks  have  been  of 
opinion  that  the  unconsecrated  wine  was  con- 
secrated by  the  commixture  with  the  con- 
secrated bread,  and  (without  any  words  of 
consecration)  was  transmuted  into  the  sacred 
blood,1  and  with  this  seems  to  agree  the  al- 
ready quoted  Michael,  Patriarch  of  Constanti- 
nople, who  is  cited  by  Leo  Allatius  in  his 
treatise  on  the  rite  of  the  presanctified.  "  The 
presanctified  is  put  into  the  mystic  chalice, 
and  so  the  wine  which  was  then  in  it,  is  changed 
into  the  holy  blood  of  the  Lord."  And  with 
this  agrees   Simeon,   Archbishop  of  Thessa- 


lonica,  in  his  answer  to  Gabriel  of  Pentapolis, 
when  he  writes  :  "  In  the  mass  of  the  Pre- 
sanctified no  consecration  of  what  is  in  the 
chalice  is  made  by  the  invocation  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  and  of  his  sign,  but  by  the  participation 
and  union  of  the  life-giving  bread,  which  is 
truly  the  body  of  Christ." 

From  this  opinion,  which  was  held  by  some 
of  the  Greeks,  it  gradually  became  the  prac- 
tice at  Constantinople  not  to  dip  the  bread 
in  the  Sacred  Blood,  as  Michael  the  patriarch 
of  this  very  church  testifies.  But  in  the  or- 
dinary Euchologion  of  the  Greeks  it  is  ex- 
pressly set  forth  that  the  presanctified  bread 
before  it  is  reserved,  should  be  dipped  in  the 
sacred  blood,  and  for  this  a  rite  is  provided. 

Leo  Allatius's  Dissertatio  de  Missa  Pros- 
sanctificalorum  should  be  read ;  an  outline  of 
the  service  as  found  in  the  Euchologion,  and  as 
reprinted  by  Renaudotius  is  as  follows. 

First  of  all  vespers  is  said.  After  some 
lessons  and  prayers,  including  the  "  Great 
Ectenia  "  and  that  for  the  Catechumens,  these 
are  dismissed. 

After  the  Catechumens  have  departed  there 
follows  the  Ectenia  of  the  Faithful.  After 
wrhich,  "Now  the  heavenly  Powers  invisibly 
minister  with   us  ;  for,    behold,  the  King  of 

7  7  J  O 

Glory  is  borne  in.  Behold  the  mystic  sacri- 
fice having  been  perfected  is  borne  aloft  by 
angels. 

"  Let  us  draw  near  with  faith  and  love,  that 
we  may  become  partakers  of  life  eternal. 
Alleluia,  Alleluia,  Alleluia. 

"Beacon.  Let  us  accomplish  our  evening 
prayer  to  the  Lord. 

"For  the  precious  and  presanctified  gifts 
that  are  offered,  let  us  pray  to  the  Lord. 

"That  our  man-loving  God,  etc." as  in  the 


1  Gerbert  makes  it  quite  evident  that  from  about  850  until  1200, 
that  is  from  Amaiarius  until  Durand,  the  same  view  was  held  in 


the  West. 
et  seqq. 


Vide  Gerbertus.    Vetus  Liturgia  Allomanica,  p.  855 


390 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


ordinary  liturgy  past  the  Lord's  prayer,  and 
down  to  the  Sancta  Sanctis,  which  reads  as 
follows  : 

Priest.  Holy  things  presanctified  for  holy 
persons. 

Choir.  One  holy,  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  to 
the  Glory  of  God  the  Father — Amen. 

Then  the  Communion  Hymn  and  the  Com- 
munion, and  the  rest  as  in  the  ordinary  liturgy, 
except  "  this  whole  evening,"  is  said  for  "this 
whole  day,"  and  another  prayer  is  provided 
in  the  room  of  that  beginning  "  Lord,  who 
blessest  them,  etc."1 

It  is  curious  to  note  that  on  Good  Friday, 
the  only  day  on  which  the  Mass  of  the  Pre- 
sanctified is  celebrated  in  the  West,  its  use 
has  died  out  in  the  East,  and  now  it  is  used 
"on  the  Wednesdays  and  Fridays  of  the  first 
six  weeks  of  the  Great  Quadragesima,  on  the 


Thursday  of  the  fifth  week,  and  on  the  Mon- 
day, Tuesday,  and  Wednesday  of  Holy  Passion 
Week.  It  may  also  be  said,  excepting  on 
Saturdays  and  Sundays,  and  on  the  Festival 
of  the  Annunciation,  on  other  days  during  the 
Fast,  to  wit,  on  those  of  festivals  and  their 
Vigils,  and  on  the  Commemoration  of  the 
Dedication  of  the  Church." 

Symeon,  who  was  bishop  of  Thessalonica, 
and  flourished  in  the  early  part  of  the  XVth 
Century,  complains  of  the  general  neglect  of 
the  Mass  of  the  Presanctified  on  Good  Friday 
in  his  time,  and  says  that  his  church  was  the 
only  one  in  the  Exarchate  that  then  retained 
it.  He  ascribes  the  disuse  to  the  example  of 
the  Church  of  Jerusalem.  See  the  matter 
treated  at  length  in  his  Quoestiones,  lv-lix. 
Mign'e's  Pat.  Grcec. 

Cf.  J.  M.  Neale  Essays  on  IAturgiology,  p.  109. 


CANON  LIII. 

Whereas  the  spiritual  relationship  is  greater  than  fleshly  affinity  ;  and  since  it  has 
come  to  our  knowledge  that  in  some  places  certain  persons  who  become  sponsors  to 
children  in  holy  salvation-bearing  baptism,  afterwards  contract  matrimony  with  their 
mothers  (being  widows),  we  decree  that  for  the  future  nothing  of  this  sort  is  to  be  done. 
But  if  any,  after  the  present  canon,  shall  be  observed  to  do  this,  they  must,  in  the  first 
place,  desist  from  this  unlawful  marriage,  and  then  be  subjected  to  the  penalties  of 
fornicators. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LIII. 
Godfathers  cannot  be  permitted  to  be  married 
with  the  mother  of  their  godchildren.     If  any  one 
is  so  joined,  let  him  do  penance  after  separation. 

Johnson. 
(Clergyman's  Vadc  Mecum.) 
The  imperial  law  forbade  the  adopter 
parent  to  marry  his  or  her  adopted  son  or 
daughter ;  for  the  godchild  was  thought  a 
sort  of  an  adopted  child.  See  Justin.,  Institut, 
Lib.  I.,  Tit.  x. 


|  Van  Espen  however  refers,  and  to  my  mind 
with  greater  truth,  to  Justinian's  law  (xxvj  of 
the  Cod.  de  Nuptiis)  which  forbids  the  mar- 
riage of  a  man  with  his  nurse  or  with  whoever 
received  him  from  the  font,  "  because,"  says 

]  the  law,  "  nothing  can  so  incite  to  parental 
affection,  and  therefore  induce  a  just  prohibi- 
tion of  marriage,  than  a  bond  of  this  sort  by 
which,  through  God's  meditation,  their  souls 
are  bound  together." 


CANON  LIV. 

The  divine  scriptures  plainly  teach  us  as  follows,  "  Thou  shalt  not  approach  to  any 
that  is  near  of  kin  to  thee  to  uncover  their  nakedness."  Basil,  the  bearer-of-God,  has 
enumerated  in  his  canons  some  marriages  which  are  prohibited  and  has  passed  over  the 
greater  part  in  silence,  and  in  both  these  ways  has  done  us  good  service.  For  by 
avoiding  a  number  of  disgraceful  names  (lest  by  such  words  he  should  pollute  his  dis- 
course) he  included  impurities  under  general  terms,  by  which  course  he  shewed  to  us 
in  a  general  way  the  marriages  which  are  forbidden.  But  since  by  such  silence,  and 
because  of  the  difficulty  of  understanding  what  marriages  are  prohibited,  the  matter 
has  become  confiised ;  it  seemed  good  to  us  to  set  it  forth  a  little  more  clearly,  decree- 
ing that  from  this  time  forth  he  who  shall  marry  with  the  daughter  of  his  father  ;  or  a 

or  a  father  and  son  with  two  girls  who  are 


father  or  son  with  a  mother  and  daughter 

1  The  English  reader  is  referred  to  G.  V.  Sharm,  Euehology,  and 
The  Book  of  A'ceds,  for  excellent  translations  of  the  Greek  offices ; 


J.  M.  Neale's  Introduction  to  the  History  of  the  Holy  Orthodox 
Eastern  Church  will,  of  course,  be  consulted. 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


391 


sisters  ;  or  a  mother  and  daughter  with  two  brothers ;  or  two  brothers  with  two  sisters, 
fall  under  the  canon  of  seven  years,  provided  they  openly  separate  from  this  unlawful 
union. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LIV. 

Thou  shalt  not  permit  the  marriage  of  a  son  of 
a  brother  to  the  daughter  of  a  brother;  nor  tvith  a 
daughter  and  her  mother  shall  there  be  the  mar- 


riage of  a  son  and  his  father  ;  neither  a  mother 
and  a  daughter  -with  two  brothers  ;  nor  brothers 
with  two  sisters.  But  should  anything  of  this 
sort  have  been  done,  together  tvith  separation, 
penance  shall  be  done  for  seven  years. 


CANON  LV. 

Since  we  understand  that  in  the  city  of  the  Komans,  in  the  holy  fast  of  Lent  they 
fast  on  the  Saturdays,  contrary  to  the  ecclesiastical  observance  which  is  traditional,  it 
seemed  good  to  the  holy  synod  that  also  in  the  Church  of  the  Romans  the  canon  shall 
immovably  stand  fast  which  says :  "  If  any  cleric  shall  be  found  to  fast  on  a  Sunday  or 
Saturday  (except  on  one  occasion  only)  he  is  to  be  deposed  ;  and  if  he  is  a  layman  he 
shall  be  cut  off." 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LV. 

The  Romans  fast  the  Sabbaths  of  Lent.  There- 
fore this  Synod  admonishes  tluit  upon  these  days 
the  Apostolical  canon  is  of  force. 

The  canon  quoted  is  LXVI.  of  the  Apos- 
tolic Canons. 

Van  Espen. 

The  Fathers  of  this  Synod  thought  that 
this  canon  of  the  Apostles  was  edited  by  the 
Apostles  themselves,  and  therefore  they  seem 
to  have  reprobated  the  custom  of  the  Roman 
Church  of  fasting  on  the  Sabbath  more  bit- ! 
terly  than   was  right.     Whence  it  happens  j 


this  is  one  of  those  canons  which  the  Roman 
Church  never  received. 

ZONAEAS. 

The  synod  took  in  hand  to  correct  this 
failing  (o-<£aA/m)  of  the  Latins  ;  but  until  this 
time  they  have  arrogantly  remained  in  their 
pertinacity,  and  so  remain  to-day.  Nor  do 
they  heed  the  ancient  canons  which  forbid 
fasting  on  the  Sabbath  except  that  one,  to 
wit  the  great  Sabbath,  nor  are  they  affected 
by  the  authority  of  this  canon.  Moreover 
the  clerics  have  no  regard  for  the  threatened 
deposition,  nor  the  laymen  for  their  being 
cut  off. 


CANON  LVI. 

We  have  likewise  learned  that  in  the  regions  of  Armenia  and  in  other  places  certain 
people  eat  eggs  and  cheese  on  the  Sabbaths  and  Lord's  days  of  the  holy  lent.  It  seems 
good  therefore  that  the  whole  Church  of  God  which  is  in  all  the  world  should  follow  one 
rule  and  keep  the  fast  perfectly,  and  as  they  abstain  from  everything  which  is  killed,  so 
also  should  they  from  eggs  and  cheese,  which  are  the  fruit  and  produce  of  those  animals 
from  which  we  abstain.  But  if  any  shall  not  observe  this  law,  if  they  be  clerics,  let  them 
be  deposed  ;  but  if  laymen,  let  them  be  cut  off. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LVI. 


Armenians  eat  eggs  and  cheese  on  the  Sab- 
baths in  Lent.  It  is  determined  that  the  whole 
world  should  abstain  from  these.  If  not  let  the 
offender  be  cast  out. 

Van  Espen. 
This  canon  shows  that  the  ancient  Greeks. 


although  they  did  not  fast  on  the  Sabbaths 
and  Lord's  days  of  Lent,  nevertheless  they  ab- 
stained on  them  from  flesh  food  ;  and  it  was 
believed  by  them  that  abstinence  from  flesh 
food  involved  also  necessarily  abstinence  from 
all  those  things  which  have  their  origin  from 
flesh.  This  also  formerly  was  observed  by 
the  Latins  in  Lent,  and  in  certain  regions  is 
known  still  to  be  the  usage. 


392 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


CANON  LVII. 

It  is  not  right  to  offer  honey  and  milk  on  the  altar 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  LVII. 
No  one  should  offer  honey  or  milk  at  the  altar. 

See  canon  iij.  of  the  Apostles,  canon  xxviij. 


of  the  African  code,  also  canon  xxviij.  of  this 
synod.  The  Greets  apparently  do  not  recog- 
nize the  exception  specified  in  the  canon  of 
the  African  Code. 


CANON  LVIII. 

None  of  those  who  are  in  the  order  of  laymen  may  distribute  the  Divine  Mysteries 
to  himself  if  a  bishop,  presbyter,  or  deacon  be  present.  But  whoso  shall  dare  to  do  such 
a  thing,  as  acting  contrary  to  what  has  been  determined  shall  be  cut  off  for  a  week  and 
thenceforth  let  him  learn  not  to  think  of  himself  more  highly  than  he  ought  to  think. 


NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LVIII. 
A   layman  shall   not  communicate   himself. 
Should  he  do  so,  let  him  be  cut  off  for  a  week. 

Van  Espen. 
It  is  well  known  that  in  the  first  centuries 
it   was   customary  that  the  Holy  Eucharist 
should  be  taken  back  by  the  faithful  to  their 


houses ;  and  that  at  home  they  received  it  at 
their  own  hands.  It  is  evident  that  this  was 
what  was  done  by  the  Anchorites  and  monks 
who  lived  in  the  deserts,  as  may  be  seen  proved 
by  Cardinal  Bona.  (Be  Rebus  Liturg.,  Lib.  II., 
cap.  xvij.).  From  this  domestic  communion  it 
is  easily  seen  how  the  abuse  arose  which  is 
condemned  in  this  canon. 


CANON  LIX. 

Baptism  is  by  no  means  to  be  administered  in  an  oratory  which  is  within  a  house ; 
but  they  who  are  about  to  be  held  worthy  of  the  spotless  illumination  are  to  go  to  a 
Catholic  Church  and  there  to  enjoy  this  gift.  But  if  any  one  shall  be  convicted  of  not 
observing  what  we  have  determined,  if  he  be  a  cleric  let  him  be  deposed,  if  a  layman  let 
him  be  cut  off. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LIX. 
In  oratories  built  in  houses  they  shcdl  not  cele- 


brate baptism.  Whoever  shcdl  not  obeerve  this,  if 
a  cleric  he  shall  be  deposed,  if  a  layman  he  shall 
be  cut  off. 


CANON  LX. 

Since  the  Apostle  exclaims  that  he  who  cleaves  to  the  Lord  is  one  spirit,  it  is  clear  that 
he  who  is  intimate  with  his  [i.e.  the  Lord's]  enemy  becomes  one  by  his  affinity  with  him. 
Therefore,  those  who  pretend  they  are  possessed  by  a  devil  and  by  their  depravity  of 
manners  feign  to  manifest  their  form  and  appearance  ;  it  seems  good  by  all  means  that 
they  should  be  punished  and  that  they  should  be  subjected  to  afflictions  and  hardships 
of  the  same  kind  as  those  to  which  they  who  are  truly  demoniacally  possessed  are  justly 
subjected  with  the  intent  of  delivering  them  from  the  [work  or  rather]  energy  of  the  devil. 

NOTES. 
Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LX.  Zonaras  says  in  his  scholion  that  even  in 

Mlioetcr  shall  pretend  to  be  possessed  by  a  his  day  people  made  the  same  claim  to  dia- 
devil,  shall  endure  the  penance  of  demoniacs.         bolical  possession. 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


393 


CANON  LXI. 

Those  who  give  themselves  up  to  soothsayers  or  to  those  who  are  called  hecaton- 
tarchs  or  to  any  such,  in  order  that  they  may  learn  from  them  what  things1  they  wish  to 
have  revealed  to  them,  let  all  such,  according  to  the  decrees  lately  made  by  the  Fathers 
concerning  them,  be  subjected  to  the  canon  of  six  years.  And  to  this  [penalty]  they  also 
should  be  subjected  who  carry  about  ~  she-bears  or  animals  of  the  kind  for  the  diversion 
and  injury  of  the  simple ;  as  well  as  those  who  tell  fortunes  and  fates,  and  genealogy, 
and  a  multitude  of  words  of  this  kind  from  the  nonsense  of  deceit  and  imposture.  Also 
those  who  are  called  expellers  of  clouds,  enchanters,  amulet-givers,  and  soothsayers. 

And  those  who  persist  in  these  things,  and  do  not  turn  away  and  flee  from  pernicious 
and  Greek  pursuits  of  this  kind,  we  declare  are  to  be  thrust  out  of  the  Church,  as  also 
the  sacred  canons  say.  "  For  what  fellowship  hath  light  with  darkness?  "  as  saith  the 
Apostle,  "  or  what  agreement  is  there  between  the  temple  of  God  and  idols  ?  or  what 
part  hath  he  that  believeth  with  an  infidel  ?   And  what  concord  hath  Christ  with  Belial  ?  " 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXI. 
Whoever  shall  deliver  himself  over  to  a  heca- 
tontarch  or  to  devils,  so  as  to  learn  some  secret,  he 
shall  be  pat  under  penance  for  six  years.  So  too 
those  ivho  take  around  a  bear,  who  join  themselves 
with  those  who  seek  incantations  and  drive  away 
the  clouds,  and  have  faith  in  fortune  and  fate, 
shall  be  cast  out  of  the  assembly  of  the  Church. 

Hefele. 
According  to  Balsamon  (in  Beveridge,  Sy- 
nod., Tom.  I.,  p.  228)  old  people  who  had  the 
reputation  of  special  knowledge  [were  called 


"  hecatontarchs"].  They  sold  the  hair  [of  these 
she  bears  and  other  animals]  as  medicine  or  for 
an  amulet.   Cf.  Balsamon  and  Zonaras  ut  supra. 

St.  Chrysostom  in  his  Homilies  on  the  Statutes 
explains,  in  answer  to  certain  who  defended 
them  on  this  ground,  that  if  these  incanta- 
tions are  made  in  the  name  of  Christ  they  are 
so  much  the  worse.  The  Saint  says,  "  More- 
over I  think  that  she  is  to  be  hated  all  the 
more  who  abuses  the  name  of  God  for  this 
purpose,  because  while  professing  to  be  a 
Christian,  she  shows  by  her  actions  that  she 
is  a  heathen." 


CANON  LXIL 

The  so-called  Calends,  and  what  are  called  Bota  and  Brumalia,  and  the  full  assembly 
which  takes  place  on  the  first  of  March,  we  wish  to  be  abolished  from  the  life  of  the 
faithful.  And  also  the  public  dances  of  women,  which  may  do  much  harm  and  mis- 
chief. Moreover  we  drive  away  from  the  life  of  Christians  the  dances  given  in  the 
names  of  those  falsely  called  gods  by  the  Greeks  whether  of  men  or  women,  and  which 
are  performed  after  an  ancient  and  un-Christian  fashion  ;  decreeing  that  no  man  from 
this  time  forth  shall  be  dressed  as  a  woman,  nor  any  woman  in  the  garb  suitable  to  men. 
Nor  shall  he  assume  comic,  satyric,  or  tragic  masks ;  nor  may  men  invoke  the  name  of 
the  execrable  Bacchus  when  they  squeeze  out  the  wine  in  the  presses  ;  nor  when  pour- 
ing out  wine  into  jars  [to  cause  a  laugh0],  practising  in  ignorance  and  vanity  the 
things  which  proceed  from  the  deceit  of  insanity.  Therefore  those  who  in  the  future 
attempt  any  of  these  things  which  are  written,  having  obtained  a  knowledge  of  them, 
if  they  be  clerics  we  order  them  to  be  deposed,  and  if  laymen  to  be  cut  off. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXII. 


Let  these  be  taken  away  from  the  lives  of  the 
faithful,  viz. :  the  Bota,  and  the  Calends,  and  the 
Brumalia,  and  salutations  in  honour  of  the  gods, 


and  comic,  satyric  and  tragic  masks,  and  the  in- 
vocation of  Bacchus  at  the  wine  press,  and  the 
laughing  at  the  wine  jars.  WJwever  shall  persist 
in  these  after  this  canon  shall  be  liable  to  give  an 
account. 


1  Bcv.  reads  in. 


2  Bev.  reads  e;ri0epo/i«Vovs. 


Not  fouud  in  Mansi. 


394 


QUINISEXT.     A.l).  C92 


On  the  Calends  see  Du  Cange  (Glossariiim '  superstitions  will  be  found  in  Balsamon's 
in  loc).  The  Bota  were  feasts  in  honour  of  scholion,  to  which  the  curious  reader  is  re- 
Pan,  the  Brumalia  feasts  in  honour  of  Bac- 1  ferred.  Van  Espen  also  has  some  valuable 
chus.     Many  particulars  with  regard  to  these  J  notes  on  the  Kalends  of  January. 


CANON  LXIII. 

We  forbid  to  be  publicly  read  in  Church,  histories  of  the  martyrs  which  have  been 
falsely  put  together  by  the  enemies  of  the  truth,  in  order  to  dishonour  the  martyrs  of 
Christ  and  induce  unbelief  among  those  who  hear  them,  but  we  order  that  such  books 
be  given  to  the  flames.  But  those  who  accept  them  or  apply  their  mind  to  them  as 
true  we  anathematize. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXIII. 
Martyrologies  made  up  by  the  ethnics  (EXXy 
vmv)  shall  not  be  published  in  church. 

What  is  condemned  is  false  histories  of 
true  martyrs,  not  (as  Johnson  erroneously 
supposes)  "  false  legends  of  pretended  mar- 


tyrs." There  have  been  martyrs,  both  royal 
and  plebeian,  in  much  later  times  whose  lives 
have  been  made  ridiculous  and  whose  mem- 
ory has  been  rendered  hateful  to  the  ignorant 
people  by  so-called  "  histories  "  which  might 
well  have  received  the  treatment  ordered  by 
the  canon. 


CANON  LXIV. 

It  does  not  befit  a  layman  to  dispute  or  teach  publicly,  thus  claiming  for  himself 
authority  to  teach,  but  he  should  yield  to  the  order  appointed  by  the  Lord,  and  to 
open  his  ears  to  those  who  have  received  the  grace  to  teach,  and  be  taught  by  them  di- 
vine things;  for  in  one  Church  God  has  made  "different  members,"  according  to  the 
word  of  the  Apostle :  and  Gregory  the  Theologian,  wisely  interpreting  this  passage, 
commends  the  order  in  vogue  with  them  saying  : x  "  This  order  brethren  we  revere,  this 
we  guard.  Let  this  one  be  the  ear  ;  that  one  the  tongue,  the  hand  or  any  other  mem- 
ber. Let  this  one  teach,  but  let  that  one  learn."  And  a  little  further  on  :  "  Learning 
in  docility  and  abounding  in  cheerfulness,  and  ministering  with  alacrity,  we  shall  not 
all  be  the  tongue  which  is  the  more  active  member,  not  all  of  us  Apostles,  not  all  proph- 
ets, nor  shall  we  all  interpret."  And  again  :  "  Why  dost  thou  make  thyself  a  shepherd 
when  thou  art  a  sheep  ?  Why  become  the  head  when  thou  art  a  foot  ?  Why  dost 
thou  try  to  be  a  commander  when  thou  art  enrolled  in  the  number  of  the  soldiers  ?  " 
And  elsewhere  :  "  Wisdom  orders,  Be  not  swift  in  words  ;  nor  compare  thyself  with  the 
rich,  being  poor  ;  nor  seek  to  be  wiser  than  the  wise."  But  if  any  one  be  found  weaken- 
ing the  present  canon,  he  is  to  be  cut  off  for  forty  days. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXIV. 
A  layman  shall  not  teach,  for  all  are  not  proph- 
ets, nor  all  apostles. 

Zonaras  points  out  that  this  canon  refers 
only  to  public  instruction  and  not  to  private. 
Van  Espen  further  notes  that  in  the  West  this 


restriction  is  limited  to  the  solemn  and  pub- 
lic preaching  and  announcing  of  the  Word  of 
God,  which  is  restricted  to  bishops,  and  only 
by  special  and  express  license  given  to  the 
other  clergy,  and  refers  to  his  own  treatment 
of  the  subject  In  jure  Eccles.,  Tom  I.,  part  1, 
tit.  svj.,  cap.  viij. 


CANON  LXV. 

The  fires  which  are  lighted  on  the  new  moons  by  some  before  their  shops  and 
houses,  upon  which  (according  to  a  certain  ancient  custom)  they  are  wont  foolishly  and 
crazily  to  leap,  Ave  order  henceforth  to  cease.  Therefore,  whosoever  shall  do  such  a 
thing,  if  he  be  a  cleric,  let  him  be  deposed  ;  but  if  he  be  a  layman,  let  him  be  cut  off. 

1  \eyaw  in  Beveridge's  text. 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


395 


For  it  is  written  in  the  Fourth  Book  of  the  Kings  "  And  Manasses  built  an  altar  to  the 
whole  host  of  heaven,  in  the  two  courts  of  the  Lord,  and  made  his  sons  to  pass  through 
the  fire,  he  used  lots  and  augurs  and  divinations  by  birds  and  made  ventriloquists  [or 
pythons l]  and  multiplied  diviners,  that  he  might  do  evil  before  the  Lord  and  provoke 


him  to  anger."  2 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXV. 


NOTES. 


The  fires  which  were  made  upon  the  new  moons 
at  the  workshops  are  condemned  and  those  ivho 
leaped  upon  them. 


Lupin  remarks  that  the  fires  kindled  on 
certain  Saints'  days  are  almost  certainly  re- 
mains of  this  heathen  practice.  These  fires 
are  often  accompanied  with  leaping,  drinking, 
and  the  wrestling  of  young  men. 


CANON  LXVI. 

From  the  holy  day  of  the  Resurrection  of  Christ  our  God  until  the  next  Lord's  day, 
for  a  whole  week,  in  the  holy  churches  the  faithful  ought  to  be  free  from  labour,  re- 
joicing in  Christ  with  psalms  and  hymns  and  spiritual  songs ;  and  celebrating  the 
feast,  and  applying  their  minds  to  the  reading  of  the  holy  Scriptures,  and  delightingin 
the  Holy  Mysteries ;  for  thus  shall  we  be  exalted  with  Christ  and  together  with 
him  be  raised  up.  Therefore,  on  the  aforesaid  days  there  must  not  be  any  horse 
races  or  any  public  spectacle. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXVI. 

The  faithful  shall  every  one  of  them  go  to  church 
during  the  whole  ivcck  after  Easter. 

Van  Espen. 

It  is  certain  that  the  whole  of  Easter  week 
was  kept  as  a  feast  by  the  whole  Church  both 
East  and  West ;  and  this  Synod  did  not  in- 
troduce this  custom  by  its  canon,  but  adopted 
this  canon  to  ensure  its  continuance. 

Here  we  have  clearly  set  forth  the  Christian 


manner  of  passing  a  feast-day,  viz.,  that  the 
faithful  on  those  days  did  give  themselves  up 
to  "  Psalms  and  Hymns  and  Spiritual  Songs," 
from  which  the  divine  office  which  we  call  to- 
day canonical  [i.e.,  chiefly  Mattins  and  Ves- 
pers] are  made  up  ;  and  hence  we  understand 
that  all  the  faithful  ought  to  attend  the  choir- 
offices,  which  was  indeed  observed  for  many 
centuries,  as  I  have  shewn  in  my  Dissertation 
on  the  Canonical  Hours,  cap.  III.,  §  1,  and 
therefore  it  was  called  "  public  "  [or  common] 
prayer. 


CANON  LXVII. 

The  divine  Scripture  commands  us  to  abstain  from  blood,  from  things  strangled,  and 
from  fornication.  Thos«  therefore  who  on  account  of  a  dainty  stomach  prepare  by  any 
art  for  food  the  blood  of  any  animal,  and  so  eat  it,  we  punish  suitably.  If  anyone 
henceforth  venture  to  eat  in  any  way  the  blood  of  an  animal,  if  he  be  a  clergyman,  let 
him  be  deposed ;  if  a  layman,  let  him  be  cut  off. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXVII. 
A  cleric  eating  blood  shall  be  deposed,  but  a 
layman  shall  be  cut  off. 

Van  Espen. 
The  apostolic  precept  of  abstaining  "  from 
blood  and  from  things  strangled  "  for  some 
ages,  not  only  among  the  Greeks  but  also 
among  the  Latins,  was  observed  in  many 
churches,  but  little  by  little  and  step  by  step 


it  died  out  in  the  whole  Church,  at  least  in 
the  Latin  Church,  altogether. 

In  this  the  Latin  Church  followed  the 
opinion  of  St.  Augustine,  Contra  Faustum 
Manichceum,  Lib.  XXXII.,  cap.  xiij.,  where  he 
teaches  at  great  length  that  the  precept  was 
given  to  Christians  only  while  the  Gentile 
Church  was  not  yet  settled.  This  passage  of 
Augustine  also  proves  that  at  that  time  Africa 
did  not  observe  this  precept  of  the  Apostles. 


1  Only  in  the  Latin. 


« II.  Kgs.  xsi.  5  &  6. 


396 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


CANON  LXVIII. 

It  is  unlawful  for  anyone  to  corrupt  or  cut  up  a  book  of  the  Old  or  New  Testament 
or  of  our  holy  and  approved  preachers  and  teachers,  or  to  give  them  up  to  the  traders 
in  books  or  to  those  who  are  called  perfumers,  or  to  hand  it  over  for  destruction  to  any 
other  like  persons  :  unless  to  be  sure  it  has  been  rendered  useless  either  by  bookworms, 
or  by  water,  or  in  some  other  way.  He  who  henceforth  shall  be  observed  to  do  such  a 
thing  shall  be  cut  off  for  one  year.  Likewise  also  he  who  buys  such  books  (unless  he 
keeps  them  for  his  own  use,  or  gives  them  to  another  for  his  benefit  to  be  preserved) 
and  has  attempted  to  corrupt  them,  let  him  be  cut  off. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  LXVIII. 

Thou  sJialt  not  destroy  nor  hand  over  copies  of 
the  Divine  Scriptures  to  he  destroyed  unless  they 
are  absolutely  useless. 


NOTES. 

Van  Espen. 

(Foot-note.) 
I  think  that  this  canon  was  directed  against 
certain  Nestorian  and  Eutychian  heretics, 
who,  that  they  might  find  some  patronage  of 
their  errors  from  the  Holy  Scriptures,  dared 
in  the  sixth  century  most  infamously  to  cor- 
rupt certain  passages  of  the  New  Testament. 


CANON  LXIX. 

It  is  not  permitted  to  a  layman  to  enter  the  sanctuary  (Holy  Altar,  Gk.),  though,  in 
accordance  with  a  certain  ancient  tradition,  the  imperial  power  and  authority  is  by  no 
means  prohibited  from  this  when  he  wishes  to  offer  his  gifts  to  the  Creator. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  or  Canon  LXIX. 
No  layman  except  the  Emperor  shall  go  up  to 


the  altar. 


Van  Espen. 


That  in  the  Latin  Church  as  well  as  in  the 
Greek  for  many  centuries  it  was  the  constant 
custom,  ratified  by  various  councils,  that  lay- 
men are  to  be  excluded  from  the  sanctuary 
and  from  the  place  marked  off  for  the  priests 
who  are  celebrating  the  divine  mysteries,  is 
so  notorious  as  to  need  no  proof,  and  the 
present  canon  shows  that  among  the  Creeks 
the  laity  were  not  admitted  to  the  sacrarium 
even  to  make  offerings. 

The  Synod  makes  but  one  exception,  to 
wit,  the  Emperor,  who  can  enter  the  rails  of 
the  holy  altar  by  its  permission  "when  he 
wishes  to  offer  his  gifts  to  the  Creator,  ac- 
cording to  ancient  custom." 

Not  without  foundation  does  the  Synod 
claim  "  ancient  custom "  for  this  ;   for  lon°' 


before,  it  is  evident,  it  was  the  case  from  the 
words  of  the  Emperor  Theodosius  the  Young- 
er. See  also  Theodoret  (H.  E.,  lib.  v.,  cap. 
xvij.). 

In  the  Latin  Church,  not  only  to  emperors, 
kings,  and  great  princes  but  also  to  patrons 
of  churches,  to  toparchs  of  places,  and  even 
to  magistrates,  seats  have  been  wont  to  be 
assigned  honoris  causa  within  the  sanctuary 
or  choir,  and  it  has  been  contended  that  these 
are  properly  due  to  such  persons. 

It  is  evident  from  Balsamon's  note  that  the 
later  Greeks  at  least  looked  upon  the  Em- 
peror as  being  (like  the  kings  of  England  and 
France)  a  persona  mixta,  sharing  in  some 
degree  the  sacerdotal  character,  as  being 
anointed  not  merely  with  oil,  but  with  the 
sacred   chrism.      Vide   in   this   connexion  J. 

j  Wickham  Legg,  The  Sacring  of  the  English 
Kings,     in    "  The     Archaeological    Journal," 

i  March,  1894. 


CANON  LXX. 

Women  are  not  permitted  to  speak  at  the  time  of  the  Divine  Liturgy ;  but,  accord- 
ing to  the  word  of  Paul  the  Apostle,  "  let  them  be  silent.  For  it  is  not  permitted  to 
them  to  speak,  but  to  be  in  subjection,  as  the  law  also  saith.  But  if  they  wish  to  learn 
anything  let  them  ask  their  own  husbands  at  home." 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  092 


397 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXX. 
Women  are  not  permitted  io  speak  in  church. 
"Let  your  -women  keep    silence    in    the 


NOTES. 

churches ;  for  it  is  not  permitted  unto  them 
to  speak,"  is  the  passage  referred  to,     I.  Cor, 


xiv.  34, 


CANON  LXXI. 

Those  who  are  taught  the  civil  laws  must  not  adopt  the  customs  of  the  Gentiles, 
nor  be  induced  to  go  to  the  theatre,  nor  to  keep  what  are  called  Cylestras,  nor  to  wear 
clothing  contrary  to  the  general  custom ;  and  this  holds  good  when  they  begin  their 
training,  when  they  reach  its  end,  and,  in  short,  all  the  time  of  its  duration.  If  any 
one  from  this  time  shall  dare  to  do  contrary  to  this  canon  he  is  to  be  cut  off. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  LXXI. 


Wliocver  devotes  himself  to  the  study  of  law, 
uses  the  manner  of  the  Gentiles,  going  to  the 
theatre,  and  rolling  in  the  dust,  or  dressing  differ- 
ently to  custom,  shall  be  cut  off. 

Liddell  and  Scott  identify  KaXlarpa  with 
KaXLvSrjSpa,  which  they  define  as  "  a  place  for 
horses  to  roll  after  exercise,"  and  note  that  it 


is  a  synonym  of  aXivtySpa.  But  it  is  interest- 
ing to  note  that  dAiV^o-is  is  "a  rolling  in  the 
dust,  an  exercise  in  which  wrestlers  rolled  on 
the  ground." 

Hefele  says  that  Balsamon  and  Zonaras 
have  not  been  able  rightly  to  explain  what 
we  are  to  understand  by  the  forbidden  "  Cy- 
lestras," but  I  think  Johnson  is  not  far  out 
of  the  way  when  he  translates  "nor  to  meddle 
with  athletic  exercises." 


CANON  LXXII. 

An  orthodox  man  is  not  permitted  to  marry  an  heretical  woman,  nor  an  orthodox 
woman  to  be  joined  to  an  heretical  man.  But  if  anything  of  this  kind  appear  to  have 
been  done  by  any  [we  require  them]  to  consider  the  marriage  null,  and  that  the  mar- 
riage be  dissolved.  For  it  is  not  fitting  to  mingle  together  what  should  not  be  min- 
gled, nor  is  it  right  that  the  sheep  be  joined  with  the  wolf,  nor  the  lot  of  sinners  with 
the  portion  of  Christ.  But  if  any  one  shall  transgress  the  things  which  we  have 
decreed  let  him  be  cut  off.  But  if  any  who  up  to  this  time  are  unbelievers  and  are  not 
yet  numbered  in  the  flock  of  the  orthodox  have  contracted  lawful  marriage  between 
themselves,  and  if  then,  one  choosing  the  right  and  coming  to  the  light  of  truth  and 
the  other  remaining  still  detained  by  the  bond  of  error  and  not  willing  to  behold  with 
steady  eye  the  divine  rays,  the  unbelieving  woman  is  pleased  to  cohabit  with  the 
believing  man,  or  the  unbelieving  man  with  the  believing  woman,  let  them  not  be 
separated,  according  to  the  divine  Apostle,  "  for  the  unbelieving  husband  is  sanctified 
by  the  wife,  and  the  unbelieving  wife  by  her  husband." 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXXII. 
A  marriage  contracted  with  heretics  is  void. 
But  if  they  have  made  the  contract  before  [conver- 
sion] let  them  remain  [united]  if  they  so  desire. 

Perhaps  none  of  the  canons  of  this  synod 
present  greater  and  more  in  solvable  difficul- 
ties than  the  present.  It  has  been  for  long 
centuries  the  tradition  of  the  Church  that 
the  marriage  of  a  baptized  Christian  with  an 
unbaptized  person  is  null,  but  this  canon 
seems  to  say  that  the  same  is  the  case  if  the 


one  party  be  a  heretic  even  though  baptized. 
If  this  is  what  the  canon  means  it  elevates 
heresy  into  an  impedimentum  dirimens.  Such 
is  not  and  never  has  been  the  law  of  the 
West,  and  such  is  not  to-day  the  practice  of 
the  Eastern  church,  which  allows  the  mar- 
riage of  its  people  with  Lutherans  and  with 
Koman  Catholics  and  never  questions  the  va- 
lidity of  their  marriages.  Van  Espen  thinks 
"  the  Greek  commentators  seem "  to  think 
that  the  heretics  referred  to  are  unbaptized  ; 
I  do  not  know  exactly  why  he  thinks  so. 


398 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


CANON  LXXIIL 

Since  the  life-giving  cross  has  shewn  to  us  Salvation,  we  should  be  careful  that  we 
render  due  honour  to  that  by  which  we  were  saved  from  the  ancient  fall.  Wherefore, 
in  mind,  in  word,  in  feeling  giving  veneration  (irpoa/cvvrjo-tv)  to  it,  we  command  that  the 
figure  of  the  cross,  which  some  have  placed  on  the  floor,  be  entirely  removed  there- 
from, lest  the  trophy  of  the  victory  won  for  us  be  desecrated  by  the  trampling  under 
foot  of  those  who  walk  over  it.  Therefore  those  who  from  this  present  represent  on  the 
pavement  the  sign  of  the  cross,  we  decree  are  to  be  cut  off. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  LXXIIL 


If  there  is  a  cross  upon  a  pavement  it  must  be 
removed. 

This  canon  defines  that  to  the  image  of  the 
cross  is  to  be  "  given  veneration  (irpoo-Kvvwo-Ls) '  bowings,  etc. 


of  the  intellect,  of  the  words,  and  of  the 
sense,"  i.e.,  the  cross  is  to  be  venerated  with 
the  interior  cultus  of  the  soul,  is  to  be  ven- 
erated with  the  exterior  culture  of  praise, 
and  also  with  sensible  acts,  such  as  kissings, 


CANON  LXXIV. 

It  is  not  permitted  to  hold  what  are  called  agapse,  that  is  love-feasts,  in  the  Lord's 
houses  or  churches,  nor  to  eat  within  the  house,  nor  to  spread  couches.  If  any  dare  to 
do  so  let  him  cease  therefrom  or  be  cut  off. 


This  is  a  renewal  of  canon  xxviij.,  of  Lac- 
dicea,  on  which  canon  see  the  notes. 


NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  LXXIV. 
Agapce  are  not  to  be  held  in  the  churches,  nor 
shall  beds  be  put  up.     Whoso  refuse  to  give  up 
these,  let  them  be  cut  off. 

CANON  LXXV. 

We  will  that  those  whose  office  it  is  to  sing  in  the  churches  do  not  use  undisciplined 
vociferations,  nor  force  nature  to  shouting,  nor  adopt  any  of  those  modes  which  are  in- 
congruous and  unsuitable  for  the  church  :  but  that  they  offer  the  psalmody  to  God,  who 
is  the  observer  of  secrets,  with  great  attention  and  compunction.  For  the  Sacred 
Oracle  taught  that  the  Sons  of  Israel  were  to  be  pious.1 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  LXXV. 


Inordinate  vociferation  of  the  psalms  is  not 
allowed,  nor  he  that  adopts  things  unsuited  to 
the  churches. 


This  question  of  the  character  of  church- 
music  was  one  early  discussed  among  Chris- 
tians, and  (long  before  the  time  of  this  synod), 
St.  Augustine,  in  debating  as  to  whether  the 


chanting  or  the  reading  of  the  psalter  was  the 
more  edifying,  concludes,  "  when  the  psalms 
are  chanted  with  a  voice  and  most  suitable 
modulation  (liquida  voce  et  convenientissima 
modulationc),  I  recognize  that  there  is  great 
utility  in  the  practice,"  and  further  on  he 
adds  that  singing  is  to  be  the  rather  approved, 
because  "  by  the  delight  given  to  the  ears  the 
infirm  soul  is  worked  up  to  pious  aspirations." 
(Confess.,  Lib.  x.,  cap.  xxxiij.). 


CANON  LXXVL 

It  is  not  right  that  those  who  are  responsible  for  reverence  to  churches  should  place 
within  the  sacred  bounds  an  eating  place,  nor  offer  food  there,  nor  make  other  sales. 
For  God  our  Saviour  teaching  us  when  he  was  tabernacling  in  the  flesh  commanded  not 

1  The  Latin  adds,  "  and  holy." 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


399 


to  make  his  Father's  house  a  house  of  merchandize.  He  also  poured  out  the  small  coins 
of  the  money-changers,  and  drave  out  all  those  who  made  common  the  temple.  If, 
therefore,  anyone  shall  be  taken  in  the  aforesaid  fault  let  him  be  cut  off. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  LXXVI. 


A  public  house  should  not  be  established 
tvithin  the  sacred  precincts  ;  and  it  is  wrong  to  sell 
food  there ;  and  whosoever  shall  do  so  shall  be 
cut  of. 


Both  Balsainon  and  Zonaras  remark  that 
this  canon  refers  to  the  vestibule  of  the 
church  and  to  the  rest  of  the  sacred  iuclosure, 
and  not  to  the  interior  of  the  church  proper, 
for  there  no  one  -would  ever  think  of  having  a 
shop. 


CANON  LXXVII. 

It  is  not  right  that  those  who  are  dedicated  to  religion,  whether  clerics  or  ascetics,1 
should  wash  in  the  bath  with  women,  nor  should  any  Christian  man  or  layman  do  so. 
For  this  is  severely  condemned  by  the  heathens.  But  if  any  one  is  caught  in  this  thing, 
if  he  is  a  cleric  let  him  be  deposed ;  if  a  layman,  let  him  be  cut  off. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXXVII. 

A  Christian  man  shall  not  bathe  with  women. 
Should  a  cleric  do  so  lie  is  to  be  deposed,  and  a 
layman  cut  of. 


This  is  a  renewal  of  the  XXXth  canon  of 
Laodicea.  It  will  be  noted,  as  Zonaras  re- 
marks, that  the  monks  must  be  counted 
among  the  laymen  who  are  to  be  cut  off,  since 
they  have  no  clerical  character  or  tonsure. 


CANON  LXXVIII. 

It  behoves  those  who  are  illuminated  to  learn  the  Creed  by  heart  and  to  recite  it  to 
the  bishop  or  presbyters  on  the  Fifth  Feria  of  the  Week. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXXVIII. 
He  that  is  illuminated  is  to  recite  (airayyeWiTui) 
the  faith  on  the  fifth  feria  of  the  week. 


This 
dicea. 


is  a  renewal  of  canon  xlvi.  of  Lao- 


CANON  LXXIX. 

As  we  confess  the  divine  birth  of  the  Virgin  to  be  without  any  childbed,  since  it 
came  to  pass  without  seed,  and  as  we  preach  this  to  the  entire  flock,  so  we  subject  to 
correction  those  who  through  ignorance  do  anything  which  is  inconsistent  therewith. 
Wherefore  since  some  on  the  day  after  the  holy  Nativity  of  Christ  our  God  are  seen 
cooking  o-6fiL8a\lv,  and  distributing  it  to  each  other,  on  pretext  of  doing  honour  to  the 
puerperia  of  the  spotless  Virgin  Maternity,  we  decree  that  henceforth  nothing  of  the 
kind  be  done  by  the  faithful.  For  this  is  not  honouring  the  Virgin  (who  above  thought 
and  speech  bare  in  the  flesh  the  incomprehensible  Word)  when  we  define 3  and  describe, 
from  ordinary  things  and  from  such  as  occur  with  ourselves,  her  ineffable  parturition. 
If  therefore  anyone  henceforth  be  discovered  doing  any  such  thing,  if  he  be  a  cleric  let 
him  be  deposed,  but  if  a  layman  let  him  be  cut  off. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXXIX. 


Whoever  after  the  feast  of  the  Mother  of  God 


shall  prepare  o-£/u'8i\iv  (semilam)  or  anything 
else  on  account  of  tchat  is  called  puerperia,  let 
him  be  cid  off. 


1  The  Latin  adds  "  that  is  to  say  '  Exercisers,'  (Exercitatores)  or  monks," 


s  The  Latin  adds  "and  measure.' 


400 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


As  the  Catholic  Church  has  always  taught 
the  Virgin-birth  as  well  as  the  Virgin-concep- 
tion of  our  Blessed  Lord,  and  has  affirmed 
that  Mary  was  ever-virgin,  even  after  she  had 
brought  forth  the  incarnate  Son,  so  it  follows 
necessarily  that  there  could  be  no  childbed 
nor  puerperal  flux.  It  need  hardly  be  re- 
marked here  that  besides  other  texts  that  of 
the  prophet  is  considered  as  teaching  thus 
much,  "  Behold  the  Virgin  (ha  alma)  shall 
conceive  and  bear  a  son,"  she  that  "  bare  "  as 
well  as  she  that  "  conceived"  being  a  virgin. 
Some  commentators  have  taken  eViAoxaa  for 
the  afterbirth,  but  Christian  Lupus,  as  Van 
Espen  notes,  has  pointed  out  that  the  early 
fathers  seem  to  have  recognized  that  the  Vir- 
gin did  have  the  "  afterbirth,"  and  this  St.  Je- 
rome expressly  teaches  in  his  book,  Contra 
Helvidium. 

The  Greeks,  however,  understood  it  as  I 
have  translated,  and  the  witness  of  Zonaras 
will  be  sufficient.    The  words  Ao^os,  Ao^atos  and 


the  like  all  signify  "lying  in,"  "a place  of  ly- 
ing in,"  and  Liddell  and  Scott  say  that  the 
latter  word  is  used  of  "  bearing  down  like 
heavy  ears  of  corn,"  which  would  well  express 
the  labour  pains. 

ZONAEAS. 

This  canon  teaches  that  the  parturition  of 
the  holy  Virgin  was  without  any  childbed. 
For  childbed  (puerpcrium)  is  the  emission  of 
the  foetus  accompanied  by  pain  and  a  flux  of 
blood  :  but  none  of  us  ever  believed  that  the 
Mother  of  God  was  subjected  to  sufferings  of 
this  sort,  for  these  are  the  consequents  of 
natural  conception,  but  her  conception  was 
supernatural ;  and  by  the  Holy  Spirit  it  was 
brought  to  pass  that  she  was  not  subjected  to 
those  evils  which  rightly  are  attached  to  nat- 
ural parturition. 

On  this  canon  should  be  read  the  extensive 
treatment  of  Asseman  (Bib.  Juris  Orient.,  Tom. 
v.,  pp.  193  et  seqq.) 


CANON  LXXX. 

If  any  bishop,  or  presbyter,  or  deacon,  or  any  of  those  who  are  enumerated  in  the 
list  of  the  clergy,  or  a  layman,  has  no  very  grave  necessity  nor  difficult  business  so  as 
to  keep  him  from  church  for  a  very  long  time,  but  being  in  town  does  not  go  to  church 
on  three  consecutive  Sundays — three  weeks — if  he  is  a  cleric  let  him  be  deposed,  but  if 
a  layman  let  him  be  cut  off. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXXX.  This  is  a  renewal  of  canon  xi.  of  Sardica 

If  anyone  without  the  constraint  of  necessity   (?iv.  according  to  the  numbering  of  Diony- 
leavcs  his  church  for  three  Lord's  days,  he  shall  \  srus  Exiguus.) 
be  deprived  of  communion. 

CANON  LXXXI. 

Whereas  we  have  heard  that  in  some  places  in  the  hymn  Trisagion  there  is  added 
after  "Holy  and  Immortal,"  "Who  was  crucified  for  us,  have  mercy  upon  us,"  and 
since  this  as  being  alien  to  piety  was  by  the  ancient  and  holy  Fathers  cast  out  of  the 
hymn,  as  also  the  violent  heretics  who  inserted  these  new  words  were  cast  out  of  the 
Church  ;  we  also,  confirming  the  things  which  were  formerly  piously  established  by  our 
holy  Fathers,  anathematize  those  who  after  this  present  decree  allow  in  church  this  or 
any  other  addition  to  the  most  sacred  hymn ;  but  if  indeed  he  who  has  transgressed  is 
of  the  sacerdotal  order,  we  command  that  he  be  deprived  of  his  priestly  dignity,  but  if 
he  be  a  layman  or  monk  let  him  be  cut  off. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXXXI. 
Wliocver  adds   to  the  hymn  Trisagion   these 
words  "  Who  wast  crucified"  shall  be  deemed 
heterodox. 

The  addition  .of  the  phrase  condemned  by 
this  canon  was  probably  made  first  by  Peter 


Fullo,  and  although  indeed  it  was  capable  of 
a  good  meaning,  if  the  whole  hymn  was  un- 
derstood as  being  addressed  to  Christ,  and 
although  this  was  admitted  by  very  many  of 
the  orthodox,  yet  as  it  was  chiefly  used  by  the 
Monophysites  and  with  an  undoubtedly  he- 
retical intention,  it  was  finally  ousted  from  this 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


401 


position  and  its  adherents  were  styled  Tkeo- 
paschites.  From  all  this  it  came  about  that 
by  518  it  was  a  source  of  disagreement  among 
the  Catholics,  some  affirming  the  expression, 
as  looked  at  by  itself,  to  be  a  touchstone  of 
orthodoxy.  The  Emperor  Justinian  tried  to 
have  it  approved  by  Pope  Hormisdas,  but  un- 
successfully, the  pontiff  only  declaring  that  it 
was  unnecessary,  and  even  dangerous.  Ful- 
gentius  of  Ruspe  and  Dionysius  Exiguus  had 
declared  it  orthodox.  Pope  John  II.  almost 
came  to  the  point  of  approving  the  phrase 
"  one  of  the  Trinity  suffered,"  nor  did  his  suc- 
cessor Agapetus  I.  speak  any  more  definitely 
on  the  point,  but  the  Fifth  Ecumenical  Coun- 
cil directly  approved  the  formula. 

But  this,  of  course,  did  not  touch  the  point 


of  its  introduction  into  the  Trisagion  or, 
more  accurately,  of  the  introduction  of  the 
words  "  who  was  crucified  for  us." 

It  should  have  been  noted  that  at  a  Home 
Synod  in  478,  Peter  Fullo  had  been  deposed 
for  the  insertion  of  this  clause,  because  he  in- 
tended to  imply  that  the  true  God  had  suf- 
fered death  upon  the  cross.  This  sentence 
was  a  confirmation  of  one  already  pronounced 
against  him  by  a  synod  held  at  Antioch 
which  had  raised  a  man,  Stephen  by  name,  to 
its  episcopal  throne. 

Such  is  the  history  of  a  matter  which,  while 
it  seemed  at  first  as  of  little  moment,  yet  for 
many  years  was  a  source  of  trouble  in  the 
Church.  ( Vide  Hefele,  History  of  the  Councils, 
Vol.  III.,  pp.  454,  457  ;  Vol.  IV.',  p.  26.) 


CANON  LXXXII.J 

In  some  pictures  of  the  venerable  icons,  a  lamb  is  painted  to  which  the  Precursor 
points  his  finger,  which  is  received  as  a  type  of  grace,  indicating  beforehand  through  the 
Law,  our  true  Lamb,  Christ  our  God.  Embracing  therefore  the  ancient  types  and 
shadows  as  symbols  of  the  truth,  and  patterns  given  to  the  Church,  Ave  prefer  "  grace 
and  truth,"  receiving  it  as  the  fulfilment  of  the  Law.  In  order  therefore  that  "  that 
which  is  perfect "  may  be  delineated  to  the  eyes  of  all,  at  least  in  coloured  expression, 
we  decree  that  the  figure  in  human  form  of  the  Lamb  who  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the 
world,  Christ  our  God,  be  henceforth  exhibited  in  images,  instead  of  the  ancient  lamb, 
so  that  all  may  understand  by  means  of  it  the  depths  of  the  humiliation  of  the  Word  of 
God,  and  that  we  may  recall  to  our  memory  his  conversation  in  the  flesh,  his  passion 
and  salutary  death,  and  his  redemption  which  was  wrought  for  the  whole  world. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXXXII. 

Thou  shalt  not  paint  a  lamb  for  the  type  of 
Christ,  but  himself. 

As  from  this  canon,  a  century  earlier  than 
the  iconoclastic  controversy,  the  prevalence 
of  pictures  is  evident,  so  from  the  canon  of 
the  same  synod  with  regard  to  the  venera- 
tion due  to  the  image  of  the  cross  (number 


lxxiii.),  we  learn  that  the  teaching  of  the 
Church  with  regard  to  relative  worship  was 
the  same  as  was  subsequently  set  forth,  so 
that  the  charge  of  innovating,  sometimes  rash- 
ly brought  against  the  Seventh  Ecumenical 
Council,  has  no  foundation  in  fact  whatever. 

This  canon  is  further  interesting  as  being 
the  one  cited  by  more  than  one  Pope  and 
Western  Authority  as  belonging  to  "  the 
Sixth  Synod." 


CANON  LXXXIIL 

No  one  may  give  the  Eucharist  to  the  bodies  of  the  dead ;  for  it  is  written  "  Take 
and  eat."    But  the  bodies  of  the  dead  can  neither  "  take  "  nor  "  eat." 


NOTES 

Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  LXXXIIL 

Tlie  Sacraments  must  not  be  given  to  a  dead 
body. 

This  is  canon  iv.  of  the  Council  of  Hippo, 


VOL.    XIV. 


in  the  year  393.  {Vide  Hefele,  Vol.  II.,  p. 
397.)  The  earlier  canon  includes  baptism 
also,  in  its  prohibition.  This  is  canons  xviii. 
and  xx.  of  the  African  code,  according  to  the 


Greek  numbering. 


Dd 


403  QUTNISEXT.     A.D.  G92 


CANON  LXXXIV. 

Following  the  canonical  laws  of  the  Fathers,  we  decree  concerning  infants,  as  often 
as  they  are  found  without  trusty  witnesses  who  say  that  they  are  undoubtedly  baptized ; 
and  as  often  as  they  are  themselves  unable  on  account  of  their  age  to  answer  satisfac- 
torily in  respect  to  the  initiatory  mysteiy  given  to  them  ;  that  they  ought  without  any 
offence  to  be  baptized,  lest  such  a  doubt  might  deprive  them  of  the  sanctification  of 
such  a  purification. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXXXIV.  This  is  canon  VII.,  of  the  Sixth  Council  of 

Carthage,  ( Vide  Hefele,  Hist,  of  the  Councils, 

Whoever  do  not  Imoio  nor  can  prove  by  clocu-   Vol.  II.,    p.    424)  ;    and  Canon  lxxv.,  of   the 

inents  that  they  have  been  baptised,  let  them  be  \  African  code  (to  which  Balsamon  attributes 

christened.  I  this  canon),  by  the  Greek  numbering,  (lxxii. 

I  by  the  Latin). 

CANON  LXXXV. 

We  have  received  from  the  Scriptures  that  in  the  mouth  of  two  or  three  witnesses 
every  word  shall  be  established.  Therefore  we  decree  that  slaves  who  are  manumitted 
by  their  masters  in  the  presence  of  three  witnesses  shall  enjoy  that  honour ;  for  they 
being  present  at  the  time  will  add  strength  and  stability  to  the  liberty  given,  and  they 
will  bring  it  to  pass  that  faith  will  be  kept  in  those  things  which  they  now  witness  were 
done  in  their  presence. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXXXV. 

A  slave  manumitted  by  his  master  before  two  witnesses  shall  be  free. 

CANON  LXXXYI. 

Those  who  to  the  destruction  of  their  own  souls  procure  and  bring  up  harlots,  if 
they  be  clerics,  they  are  to  be  [cut  off  and]  deposed,  if  laymen  to  be  cut  off. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXXXVI.  The  brackets  enclose  the  reading  of  Herve- 

tus.     But  Zonaras  had  this  same  text,  and 
Whoever  gathers  together  harlots  to  the  ruin  of  \  therefore  it  may  be  safely  followed  instead  of 
souls,  shall  be  cut  of.  \  that  of  Balsamon,  as  edited  by  Beveridge. 

CANON  LXXXVII. 

She  who  has  left  her  husband  is  an  adulteress  if  she  has  come  to  another,  accord- 
ing to  the  holy  and  divine  Basil,  who  has  gathered  this  most  excellently  from  the 
prophet  Jeremiah :  "  If  a  woman  has  become  another  man's,  her  husband  shall  not 
return  to  her,  but  being  defiled  she  shall  remain  defiled;"  and  again,  "He  who  has  an 
adulteress  is  senseless  and  impious."  If  therefore  she  appears  to  have  departed  from 
her  husband  without  reason,  he  is  deserving  of  pardon  and  she  of  punishment.  And 
pardon  shall  be  given  to  him  that  he  may  be  in  communion  with  the  Church.  But  he 
who  leaves  the  wife  lawfully  given  him,  and  shall  take  another  is  guilty  of  adultery  by 
the  sentence  of  the  Lord.  And  it  has  been  decreed  by  our  Fathers  that  they  who  are 
such  must  be  "  weepers  "  for  a  year,  "  hearers  "  for  two  years,  "  prostrators  "  for  three 
years,  and  in  the  seventh  year  to  stand  with  the  faithful  and  thus  be  counted  worthy  of 
the  Oblation  [if  with  tears  they  do  penance.] 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692  403 


NOTES. 
Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXXXVII. 


She  who  goes  from  her  husband  io  another  man 
is  an  adulteress.  And  he  who  from  his  wife 
goes  to  another  woman  is  an  adulterer  according 
to  the  word  of  the  Lord, 


Compare  with  this  canon  Iviij.  of  St.  Basil, 


The  words  in  brackets  are  found  in  Beveridge, 
but  were  lacking  in  Hervetus's  text. 

Johnson. 
Here  discipline  is  relaxed  ;  formerly  an 
adulteress  did  fifteen  years'  penance.  See 
Can.  Bas.,  58.  No  wonder  if  in  200  yeai's' 
time  from  St,  Basil,  the  severity  of  discipline 
was  abated. 


CANON   LXXXVIII. 

No  one  may  drive  any  beast  into  a  church  except  perchance  a  traveller,  urged  thereto 
by  the  greatest  necessity,  in  default  of  a  shed  or  resting-place,  may  have  turned  aside 
into  said  church.  For  unless  the  beast  had  been  taken  inside,  it  would  have  perished, 
and  he,  by  the  loss  of  his  beast  of  burden,  and  thus  without  means  of  continuing  his 
journey,  would  be  in  peril  of  death.  And  we  are  taught  that  the  Sabbath  was  made 
for  man  :  wherefore  also  the  safety  and  comfort  of  man  are  by  all  means  to  be  placed 
first.  But  should  anyone  be  detected  without  any  necessity  such  as  we  have  just  men- 
tioned, leading  his  beast  into  a  church,  if  he  be  a  cleric  let  him  be  deposed,  and  if  a 
layman  let  him  be  cut  off. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXXXVIII. 
Cattle  shall  not  be  led  into  the  holy  halls,  unless  the  greatest  necessity  compels  it. 

CANON    LXXXIX. 

The  faithful  spending  the  days  of  the  Salutatory  Passion  in  fasting,  praying  and  com- 
punction of  heart,  ought  to  fast  until  the  midnight  of  the  Great  Sabbath :  since  the 
divine  Evangelists,  Matthew  and  Luke,  have  shewn  us  how  late  at  night  it  was  [that 
the  resurrection  took  place],  the  one  by  using  the  words  6-^re  craft ftaTwv,  and  the  other 
by  the  words  opQpov  fiaSeos. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXXXIX. 
On  the  Great  Sabbath  the  fast  must  be  continued  until  midnight, 

CANON  XC. 

We  have  received  from  our  divine  Fathers  the  canon  law  that  in  honour  of  Christ's 
resurrection,  we  are  not  to  kneel  on  Sundays.  Lest  therefore  we  should  ignore  the 
fulness  of  this  observance  we  make  it  plain  to  the  faithful  that  after  the  priests  have 
gone  to  the  Altar  for  Vespers  on  Saturdays  (according  to  the  prevailing  custom)  no  one 
shall  kneel  in  prayer  until  the  evening  of  Sunday,  at  which  time  after  the  entrance  for 
compline,  again  with  bended  knees  we  offer  our  prayers  to  the  Lord.  For  taking  the 
night  after  the  Sabbath,  which  was  the  forerunner  of  our  Lord's  resurrection,  we  begin 
from  it  to  sing  in  the  spirit  hymns  to  God,  leading  our  feast  out  of  darkness  into  light, 
and  thus  during  an  entire  day  and  night  we  celebrate  the  Resurrect  ion. 


NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XC. 
From  the  evening  entrance  of  the  Sabbath  until 
the  evening  entrance  of  the  Lord's  day  there  must 
be  no  kneeling. 

nd 


Van  Espen. 
No  doubt   the   synod  by  the  words    "  we 
have  received  from  the  divine  Fathers,"  re- 
ferred to  canon  xx.  of  the  Council  of  Nice. 


404 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  G92 


For  many  centuries  this  custom  was  pre- 
served even  in  the  Latin  Church  ;  and  the 
custom  of  keeping  feasts  and  whole  days 
generally  from  evening  to  evening  is  believed 
to  have  been  an  Apostolic  tradition,  received 


by  them  from  the  Jews.  At  the  end  of  the 
VHIth  Century  the  Synod  of  Frankfort  de- 
clared in  its  xxj.  canon,  that  "  the  Lord's 
day  should  be  kept  from  evening  to  even- 
ing-."1 


CANON  XCI. 

Those  who  give  drags  for  procuring  abortion,  and  those  who  receive  poisons  to  kill 
the  foetus,  are  subjected  to  the  penalty  of  murder, 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XCI.  I  of  murder.     And  we  pay  no  attention  to  the 

Whoever  gives  or  receives  medicine  to  produce  \  subtile  distinction  as  to  whether  the  foetus  was 


abortion  is  a  homicide. 

See  Canon  XXI.  of  Ancyra,  and  Canon  II. 
of  St.  Basil  ;  to  wit,  "  She  who  purposely  de- 
stroys the  foetus,  shall  suffer  the  punishment 


formed  or  unformed.  And  by  this  not  only 
is  justice  satisfied  for  the  child  that  should 
have  been  born,  but'  also  for  her  who  pre- 
pared for  herself  the  snares,  since  the  women 
very  often  die  who  make  such  experiments." 


CANON  XCII. 

The  holy  synod  decrees  that  those  who  in  the  name  of  marriage  carry  off  women 
and  those  who  in  any  way  assist  the  ravishers,  if  they  be  clerics,  they  shall  lose  their 
rank,  but  if  they  be  laymen  they  shall  be  anathematized. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XCII. 
Tliose  who  run  aivay  with  women,  and  those 
who  assist  and  give  a  hand,  if  they  be  clerics 
they  shall  be  deposed,  if  laymen   they  shall  be 
anathematized. 


Van  Espen. 
This  canon  simply  renews  and  confirms 
Canon  xxvij  of  Chalcedon. 


CANON  XCIII. 

If  the  wife  of  a  man  who  has  gone  away  and  does  not  appear,  cohabit  with  another 
before  she  is  assured  of  the  death  of  the  first,  she  is  an  adulteress.  The  wives  of  sol- 
diers who  have  married  husbands  who  do  not  appear  are  in  the  same  case ;  as  are  also 
the}'  who  on  account  of  the  wanderings  of  their  husbands  do  not  wait  for  their  return. 
But  the  circumstance  here  has  some  excuse,  in  that  the  suspicion  of  his  death  becomes 
very  great.  But  she  who  in  ignorance  has  married  a  man  who  at  the  time  was  deserted 
by  his  wife,  and  then  is  dismissed  because  his  first  wife  returns  to  him,  has  indeed  com- 
mitted fornication,  but  through  ignorance  ;  therefore  she  is  not  prevented  from  marry- 
ing, but  it  is  better  if  she  remain  as  she  is.  If  a  soldier  shall  return  after  a  long  time, 
and  find  his  wife  on  account  of  his  long  absence  has  been  united  to  another  man,  if  he 
so  wishes,  he  may  receive  his  own  wife  [back  again],  pardon  being  extended  in  consid- 
eration of  their  ignorance  both  to  her  and  to  the  man  who  took  her  home  in  second 
marriage. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XCIII. 
A  woman  ivho  when  her  husband  does  not  turn 
up,  before  she  is  certain  he  is  dead,  takes  another 
commits  adultery.     But  when  the  man 
he  may  receive  her  again,  if  he  so  elects. 


Compare  in  the  Corpus  Juris  Canonici,  Gra- 

tian's  Decretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa  xxxiv.,  Qua^st. 

I.    and  II.      Epistle  of   St.  Leo  to  Nicetas. 

returns |  Also   compare   of  St.    Basil's   canons  xxxj., 

xxxvj.,  and  xlvj. 


i  "  The  evening  and  the  morning  were  the  first  day."— Gen,  i.  5. 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


405 


CANON  XCIV. 

The  canon  subjects  to  penalties  those  who  take  heathen  oaths,  and  we  decree  to  them 
excommunication. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XCIV. 

Whoever  uses  Gentile  oaths,  is  worthy  of  pun- 
ishment, for  he  is  cut  off. 

The  reference  is  to  canon  lxxxj.  of  St.  Ba- 
sil's canons. 


Van  Espen. 
Tertullian  (I)e  Idolatria,  cap.  xx.)  supposes 
that  to  swear  by  the  false  gods  of  the  Gentiles, 
contains  in  itself  some  idolatry,  an  opinion 
shared  by  St.  Basil,  comparing  those  using 
such  oaths  with  them  who  betrayed  Christ, 
and  who  are  partakers  of  the  talk  of  devils. 


CANON  XCV. 

Those  who  from  the  heretics  come  over  to  orthodoxy,  and  to  the  number  of  those 
who  should  be  saved,  we  receive  according  to  the  following  order  and  custom.  Ari- 
ans,  Macedonians,  Novatians,  who  call  themselves  Cathari,  Aristeri,  and  Testareskaide- 
catitae,  or  Tetraditae,  and  Apollinarians,  we  receive  on  their  presentation  of  certificates 
and  on  their  anathematizing  every  heresy  which  does  not  hold  as  does  the  holy  Apos» 
tolic  Church  of  God :  then  first  of  all  we  anoint  them  with  the  holy  chrism  on  their  fore- 
heads, eyes,  nostrils,  mouth  and  ears ;  and  as  we  seal  them  we  say — "  The  seal  of  the 
gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost." 

But  concerning  the  Paulianists  it  has  been  determined  by  the  Catholic  Church  that 
they  shall  by  all  means  be  rebaptized.  The  Eunomeans  also,  who  baptize  with  one  im- 
mersion; andtheMontanists,  who  here  are  called  Phrygians;  and  the  Sabellians,  who  con- 
sider the  Son  to  be  the  same  as  the  Father,  and  are  guilty  in  certain  other  grave  matters, 
and  all  the  other  heresies — for  there  are  many  heretics  here,  especially  those  who  come 
from  the  region  of  the  Galatians — all  of  their  number  Avho  are  desirous  of  coming  to  the 
Orthodox  faith,  we  receive  as  Gentiles.  And  on  the  first  day  we  make  them  Christians, 
on  the  second  Catechumens,  then  on  the  third  day  we  exorcise  them,  at  the  same  time 
also  breathing  thrice  upon  their  faces  and  ears ;  and  thus  we  initiate  them,  and  we 
make  them  spend  time  in  church  and  hear  the  Scriptures ;  and  then  we  baptize  them. 

And  the  Maniclueans,  and  Valentinians  and  Marcionites  and  all  of  similar  heresies 
must  give  certificates  and  anathematize  each  his  own  heresy,  and  also  Nestorius,  Eu- 
tyches,  Dioscorus,  Severus,  and  the  other  chiefs  of  such  heresies,  and  those  who  think 
with  them,  and  all  the  aforesaid  heresies ;  and  so  they  become  partakers  of  the  holy 
Communion. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XCV. 
Thus  ive  admit  those  converted  from  the  here- 
tics. We  anoint  with  the  holy  chrism,  upon  the 
broiv,  eyes,  nostrils,  mouth,  and  ears,  Arians, 
Macedonians,  Novatians  {who  are  called  Cathari), 
Aristerians  (who  are  called  Quartadecimans  or 
Tetraditce),  and  Apollinarians  when  they  anathe- 
matize every  heresy ;  and  siyn  them  with  the 
cross  as  ive  say,  "  The  Seal  of  the  gift  of  the 
Holy  Ghost     Amen." 

Compare  with  this  Canon  vij.  of  Laodicea, 
and  the  so-called  vijth,  canon  of  the  First 
Council  of  Constantinople. 

The  text  I  have  translated  is  that  ordinarily 
given,  I  now  present  to  the  reader  Hefele's 
argument  for  its  worthlessness. 


HefelE. 
This  text  is  undoubtedly  false,  for  (a)  the 
baptism  of  the  Gnostics  was,  according  to  the 
recognized  ecclesiastical  principle,  invalid, 
and  a  Gnostic  coming  into  the  Church  was 
required  to  be  baptized  anew  ;  (b)  besides, 
it  would  have  us  first  to  require  of  a  Gnostic 
an  anathema  on  Nestorius,  Eutyches,  etc. 
More  accurate,  therefore,  is  the  text,  as  it  is 
given  by  Beveridge,  and  as  Balsamon  bad  it, 
to  the  effect  that :  "In  the  same  way  (as  the 
preceding)  are  the  Manicliaeans,  Valentinians, 
Marcionites,  and  similar  heretics  to  be 
treated  (i.e.,  to  be  baptized  anew) ;  but  the 
Nestorians  must  (merely)  present  certificates, 
and  anathematize  their  heresy,  Nestorius, 
Eutyches,  etc."    Here  we  have  only  this  mis- 


406 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


take,  that  the  Nestorians  must  anathema- 
tize, among  others,  also  Eutyches,  which  they 
would  certainly  have  done  very  willingly. 
At  the  best,  we  must  suppose  that  there  is  a 
gap  in  the  text,  and  that  after,  "  all  of  similar 
heresies,"  we  must  add  "  the  later  heretics 
must  present  certificates  and  anathematize 
Nestorius,  Eutyches,  etc." 

There  seems  but  little  doubt  that  whatever 


may  be  the  truth  in  the  matter,  the  early  theo- 
logians and  fathers  held  that  even  though  the 
external  rite  of  Holy  Baptism  might  be  validly 
performed  by  schismatics  and  heretics,  yet 
that  by  it  the  person  so  baptized  did  not  re- 
ceive the  Holy  Ghost,  and  this  opinion  was 
not  confined  to  the  East,  but  was  also  preva- 
lent in  the  West.  Vide  Rupertus,  De  Divinis 
Officiis,  Lib.  X.,  Cap.  xxv. 


CANON  XCVI. 

Those  avIio  by  baptism  have  put  on  Christ  have  professed  that  they  will  copy  his 
manner  of  life  which  he  led  in  the  flesh.  Those  therefore  who  adorn  and  arrange  their 
hair  to  the  detriment  of  those  who  see  them,  that  is  by  cunningly  devised  intertwinings, 
and  by  this  means  put  a  bait  in  the  way  of  unstable  souls,  we  take  in  hand  to  cure 
paternally  with  a  suitable  punishment :  training  them  and  teaching  them  to  live  soberly, 
in  order  that  having  laid  aside  the  deceit  and  vanity  of  material  things,  they  may  give 
their  minds  continually  to  a  life  which  is  blessed  and  free  from  mischief,  and  have  their 
conversation  in  fear,  pure,  [and  holy x]  ;  and  thus  come  as  near  as  possible  to  God 
through  their  purity  of  life ;  and  adorn  the  inner  man  rather  than  the  outer,  and  that 
with  virtues,  and  good  and  blameless  manners,  so  that  they  leave  in  themselves  no 
remains  of  the  left-handedness  of  the  adversary.  But  if  any  shall  act  contrary  to  the 
present  canon  let  him  be  cut  off. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  oe  Canon  XCVI. 

Whoever  twist  up  their  hair  into  artistic  plaits 
for  the  destruction  of  the  beholders  are  to  be  cut  off. 

For  the  intricate  manner  of  dressing  the 
hair  used  in  the  East,  and  for  a  description  of 


the  golden  dye,  see  the  scholion  of  Zonaras. 
Van  Espen  remarks  that  the  curious  care  for 
somebody  else's  hair  in  the  form  of  wigs,  so 
prevalent  with  many  laymen  and  ecclesiastics 
of  his  day,  is  the  same  vice  condemned  by  the 
canon  in  another  shape.2 


CANON  XCVII. 

Those  who  have  commerce  with  a  wife  or  in  any  other  manner  without  regard  thereto 
make  sacred  places  common,  and  treat  them  with  contempt  and  thus  remain  in  them,  we 
order  all  such  to  be  expelled,  even  from  the  dwellings  of  the  catechumens  which  are  in  the 
venerable  temples.  And  if  any  one  shall  not  observe  these  directions,  if  he  be  a  cleric 
let  him  be  deposed,  but  if  a  layman  let  him  be  cut  off. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XCVII. 


Whoever  in  a  temple  has  commerce  with  his 
wife  and  remains  there  out  of  contempt,  shall  be 
expelled  even  from  the  Catechumens.  If  any  one 
shall  not  observe  this  he  shall  be  deposed  or  cut  off. 


ZoNAfiAS. 

In  the  name  of  holy  places,  not  the  church 
itself  but  the  adjoining  and  dependent  build- 
ings are  intended  such  as  those  which  are 
called  the  "  Catechumena."  For  no  one  would 
be  audacious  enough  to  wish  to  cohabit  with 
his  wife  in  the  very  temple  itself. 


CANON  XCVIII. 

He  who  brings  to  the  intercourse  of  marriage  a  woman  who  is  betrothed  to  another 
man  who  is  still  alive,  is  to  lie  under  the  charge  of  adultery. 

1  These  words  only  in  the  Latin.  I  not  to  disturb  them,  and  the  surplices  were  slit  all  the  way  down 

2  It  is  curious  to  note  that  so  great  was  the  care  of  the  clergy  for    the  front,  as  they  continue  in  some  places  even  down  to  our  own 
their  wigs  that  the  very  shape  of  the  vestments  was  changed'so  as  |  days,  after  the  original  -cause  had  loner  passed  away. 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.    692  407 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XCVIII. 


not  an  "adulterer."  He  tries  therefore  to  in- 
troduce the  idea  that  though  he  is  not  an 
adulterer,  yet  he  is  to  be  punished  as  if  he 
were.  But  the  Greek  Hardly  seems  patient  of 
this  meaning,  and  the  Ancient  Epitome  says 
in  so  many  words  that  he  is  an  adulterer. 

On  account  of  this  difficult}'  some  hare  sup- 
posed that  the  espousals  here  mentioned  were 


He  is  an  adulterer  who  takes  one  espoused  to 
some  one  else. 

Aristenus's  commentary  on  this  canon  is 
2a^r;s.  A  more  extraordinary  estimate  of  it- 
could  hardly  be  made.  So  far  from  the  mean- 
ing being  "perspicuous,"  as  the  Latin transla- 1  not  defuturo  but  deprcesenti,  and  that  there- 
tion  has  it,  the  meaning  seems  to  be  past  find-  j  fore  it  was  the  case  of  stealing  a  real  wife  of 
ing  out ;  for,  as  Van  Espen  remarks,  a  man  i  another  man.  But  this  explanation  also  is 
who  sins  with  a  betrothed  woman  is  certainly  !  involved  in  many  difficulties. 

CANON  XCIX. 

We  have  further  learned  that,  in  the  regions  of  the  Armenians,  certain  persons  boil 
joints  of  meat  within  the  sanctuary  and  offer  portions  to  the  priests,  distributing  it 
after  the  Jewish  fashion.  Wherefore,  that  we  may  keep  the  church  undefiled,  we 
decree  that  it  is  not  lawful  for  any  priest  to  seize  the  separate  portions  of  flesh  meat 
from  those  who  offer  them,  but  they  are  to  be  content  with  what  he  that  offers  pleases 
to  give  them ;  and  further  we  decree  that  such  offering  be  made  outside  the  church. 
And  if  any  one  does  not  thus,  let  him  be  cut  off. 


NOTES 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XCIX, 


There  are  some  who  like  the  Jews  cook  meat 
in  the  holy  places.  Whoever  permits  this,  or 
receives  aught  from  them,  is  not  Jit  to  be  priest. 
But  if  any  one  should  of  his  own  free  choice 
offer  it,  then  he  might  receive  as  much  as  the 


offerer  chose  to  give  him,  provided  the  offer  were 
made  outside  the  church. 

A  similar  Judaizing  superstitious  custom 
was  also  found  in  the  West,  of  which  Wala- 
frid  Strabo  gives  an  account  in  the  IX.  Cen-' 
tury  {Be  Rebus  Ecclcsiasticis,  cap.  xviii,). 


CANON  C. 

"Let  thine  eyes  behold  the  thing  which  is  right,"  orders  Wisdom,  "and  keep 
thine  heart  with  all  care."  For  the  bodily  senses  easily  bring  their  own  impressions 
into  the  soul.  Therefore  we  order  that  henceforth  there  shall  in  no  way  be  made 
pictures,  whether  they  are  in  paintings  or  in  what  way  so  ever,  which  attract  the  eye 
and  corrupt  the  mind,  and  incite  it  to  the  enkindling  of  base  pleasures.  And  if  any 
one  shall  attempt  to  do  this  he  is  to  be  cut  off. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  C. 
Pictures  which  induce  impurity  are  not  to  be  painted.     Whoso  shall  transgress  shall  be  cut  off. 

CANON  CI. 

The  great  and  divine  Apostle  Paul  with  loud  voice  calls  man  created  in  the  image 
of  God,  the  body  and  temple  of  Christ.  Excelling,  therefore,  every  sensible  creature,  he 
who  by  the  saving  Passion  has  attained  to  the  celestial  dignity,  eating  and  drinking 
Christ,  is  fitted  in  all  respects  for  eternal  life,  sanctifying  his  soul  and  body  by  the 
participation  of  divine  grace.  Wherefore,  if  any  one  wishes  to  be  a  participator  of  the 
immaculate  Body  in  the  time  of  the  Synaxis,  and  to  offer  himself  for  the  communion, 


40  i 


QUINISEXT.     A.D.  692 


let  him  draw  near,  arranging  his  hands  in  the  form  of  a  cross,  and  so  let  him  receive 
the  communion  of  grace.  But  such  as,  instead  of  their  hands,  make  vessels  of  gold  or 
other  materials  for  the  reception  of  the  divine  gift,  and  by  these  receive  the  immaculate 
communion,  we  by  no  means  allow  to  come,  as  preferring  inanimate  and  inferior  matter 
to  the  image  of  God.  But  if  any  one  shall  be  found  imparting  the  immaculate  Com- 
munion to  those  who  bring  vessels  of  this  kind,  let  him  be  cut  off  as  well  as  the  one 
who  brings  them. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CI. 

Whoever  comes  to  receive  the  Eucharist  holds 
his  hands  in  the  form  of  a  cross,  and  takes  it 
with  his  mouth ;  tvhoever  shall  prepare  a  recep- 
tacle of  gold  or  of  any  oflier  material  instead  of 
Ms  hand,  shall  he  cut  off. 

Balsamon. 

At  first,  perchance,  this  was  invented  from 
pious  feelings,  because  the  hand  which  came 
in  contact  with  base  and  unworthy  things 
was  not  worthy  to  receive  the  Lord's  body, 
but,  as  time  went  on,  piety  was  turned  to  the 
injury  of  the  soul,  so  that  those  who  did 
this  when  they  came  to  receive  with  an  arro- 


gant and  insolent  bearing,  were  preferred  to 
the  poor. 

St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem. 
(Catcchcs.  Mystagog.  v.  ') 
When  thou  goest  to  receive  communion  go 
not  with  thy  wrists  extended,  nor  with  thy 
fingers  separated,  but  placing  thy  left  hand 
as  a  throne  for  thy  right,  which  is  to  receive 
so  great  a  King,  and  in  the  hollow  of  the 
palm  receive  the  body  of  Christ,  saying,  Amen. 

Vide  also  St.  John  Damascene,  Be  Fide 
Orthodoxa,  lib.  iv.,  cap.  xiv.  On  the  whole 
matter  cf.  Card.  Bona,  De  Rebus  Lit.,  lib.  ii., 
cap.  xvij.,  n.  3. 


.  CANON   CII. 

It  behoves  those  who  have  received  from  God  the  power  to  loose  and  bind,  to 
consider  the  quality  of  the  sin  and  the  readiness  of  the  sinner  for  conversion,  and  to 
apply  medicine  suitable  for  the  disease,  lest  if  he  is  injudicious  in  each  of  these  respects 
he  should  fail  in  regard  to  the  healing  of  the  sick  man.  For  the  disease  of  sin  is  not 
simple,  but  various  and  multiform,  and  it  germinates  many  mischievous  offshoots,  from 
which  much  evil  is  diffused,  and  it  proceeds  further  until  it  is  checked  by  the  power  of 
the  physician.  Wherefore  he  who  professes  the  science  of  spiritual  medicine  ought  first 
of  all  to  consider  the  disposition  of  him  who  has  sinned,  and  to  see  whether  he  tends 
to  health  or  (on  the  contrary)  provokes  to  himself  disease  by  his  own  behaviour,  and  to 
look  how  he  can  care  for  his  manner  of  life  during  the  interval.  And  if  he  does  not  resist 
the  physician,  and  if  the  ulcer  of  the  soul  is  increased  by  the  application  of  the  imposed 
medicaments,  then  let  him  mete  out  mercy  to  him  according  as  he  is  worthy  of  it.  For 
the  whole  account  is  between  God  and  him  to  whom  the  pastoral  rule  has  been  deliv- 
ered, to  lead  back  the  Avandering  sheep  and  to  cure  that  which  is  wounded  by  the 
serpent ;  and  that  he  may  neither  cast  them  down  into  the  precipices  of  despair,  nor 
loosen  the  bridle  towards  dissolution  or  contempt  of  life ;  but  in  some  way  or  other, 
either  by  means  of  sternness  and  astringency,  or  by  greater  softness  and  mild  medicines, 
to  resist  this  sickness  and  exert  himself  for  the  healing  of  the  ulcer,  now  examining  the 
fruits  of  his  repentance  and  wisely  managing  the  man  who  is  called  to  higher  illumi- 
nation. For  we  ought  to  know  two  things,  to  wit,  the  things  which  belong  to  strictness 
and  those  which  belong  to  custom,  and  to  follow  the  ti'aditional  form  in  the  case  of 
those  who  are  not  fitted  for  the  highest  things,  as  holy  Basil  teaches  us. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CII. 

The  character  of  a  sin  nmst  be  considered  from  all  points  and  conversion  expected.     And  so  lei 

mercy  be  meted  out. 


i  Oxford  Translation,  p.  279. 


THE  CANONS  OF  THE  SYNODS  OF  SARDICA,  CARTHAGE, 
CONSTANTINOPLE,  AND  CARTHAGE  UNDER  ST.  CYP- 
RIAN, WHICH  CANONS  WERE  RECEIVED  BY  THE  COUN- 
CIL IN   TRULLO   AND   RATIFIED   BY   II.   NICE. 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE. 

I  have  placed  the  canons  of  Sardica  and  those  of  Carthage  and  those  of  the  Council 
held  at  Constantinople  under  Nectarius  and  Theophilus,  and  that  of  the  Council  of  Car- 
thage under  St.  Cyprian,  immediately  after  the  Council  in  Trallo,  because  in  the  second 
canon  of  that  synod  they  are  for  the  first  time  mentioned  by  name  as  being  accepted  by  the 
Universal  Church. 


THE   COUNCIL   OF  SARDICA. 

A.D.  343  or  344. 

Emperors.— Gonstantius  and  Contans. 
Pope.  -Julius  I. 


EJenchus, 
Introduction  on  the  date  of  the  synod. 
Mote  on  the  text  of  the  canons. 

Nodes'  Camm  WWl  th6  AnCknt  Eplt0mG  and 


Other  Acts  of  the  Synod. 
Excursus  as  to  this  synod's  claim  to  ecu- 
menical  character. 


INTRODUCTION  ON  THE  DATE  OF  THE  COUNCIL. 

(Hefele,  Hist.  Councils,  Vol.  II.,  pp.  8G  et  seqq.) 

Our  inquiries  concerning  the  Synod  of  Sardica  must  begin  with  a  chronological  exami- 
nation of  the  date  of  this  assembly.  Socrates  and  Sozomen  place  it  expressly  in  the  year 
347  a.d.,  with  the  more  precise  statement  that  it  was  held  under  the  Consuls  Eufinus  and 
Eusebius  in  the  eleventh  year  after  the  death  of  Constantine  the  Great,  therefore  after  the 
22d  of  May,  347,  according  to  our  way  of  reckoning. 

This  was  the  most  general  view  until,  rather  more  than  a  hundred  years  ago,  the  learned 
Scipio  Maffei  discovered  at  Verona,  the  fragment  of  a  Latin  translation  of  an  old  Alexan- 
drian chronicle  (the  Historia  Acepliala) ,  and  edited  it  in  the  third  volume  of  the  Osservazioni 
Litterarii  in  1738.  This  fragment  contains  the  information  that  on  the  24th  Phaophi 
(October  21),  under  the  Consuls  Constantius  IV.  and  Constans  II.,  in  the  year  346,  Athana- 
sius  had  returned  to  Alexandria  from  his  second  exile.  As  it  is  universally  allowed,  how- 
ever, as  we  shall  presently  show  more  clearly,  that  this  return  certainly  only  took  place 
about  two  years  after  the  Synod  of  Sardica,  Mansi  hence  saw  the  necessity  of  dating  this 
synod  as  early  as  the  year  344.  In  this  he  is  confirmed  by  St.  Jerome,  in  the  continuation 
of  the  Eusebian  chronicle,  who,  in  accordance  with  the  Historia  Acephala,  has  assigned  the 
return  of  St.  Athanasius  to  the  tenth  year  of  the  reign  of  the  Emperor  Constantius,  in  346. 

Many  learned  men  now  followed  Mansi,  the  greater  number  blindly  ;  others,  again,  sought 
to  contradict  him,  at  first  the  learned  Dominican,  Mamachi ;  then  Dr.  Wetzer  (Professor  at 
Freiburg)  ;  and  latterly,  we  ourselves  in  a  treatise,  "  Controversen  fiber  die  Synode  von 
Sardika,"  in  the  Tilbinger  Theol.  Quartalschrift,  1852.  Soon  after  there  was  a  fresh  discovery. 
Some  of  the  Paschal  Letters  of  St.  Athanasius,  which  until  then  were  supposed  to  be  lost, 
were  discovered  in  an  Egyptian  monastery,  with  a  very  ancient  preface  translated  into 
Syriac,  and  were  published  in  that  language  by  Cureton  in  London,  and  in  the  year  1852  in 
German  by  Professor  Larsow,  at  the  Grey  Friars  Convent,  in  Berlin. 

Among  these  Festal  Letters,  the  nineteenth,  intended  for  Easter  347,  and  therefore  com- 
posed in  the  beginning  of  that  year,  had  been  re-written  in  Alexandria,  as  the  introduction 
expressly  states.  This  confirms  the  statement  of  the  Historia  Acephala,  that  Athanasius  was 
already  returned  to  Alexandria  in  October,  346,  and  confirms  the  chief  points  of  Mansi's 
hypothesis ;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  it  unanswerably  refutes,  by  Athanasius'  own  testi- 
mony, the  statements  of  Socrates  and  Sozomen  (which,  from  their  dependence  on  each  other, 
only  count  as  one),  with  reference  to  the  date  347. 

As  we  said,  Mansi  placed  this  Synod  in  the  year  344 ;  but  the  old  preface  to  the  Festal 
Letters  of  St.  Athanasius  dates  it  in  the  year  343,  and  in  fact  we  can  now  only  hesitate  be- 
tween the  dates  343  and  344.  If  the  preface  were  as  ancient  and  as  powerfully  convincing 
as  the  Festal  Letters  themselves,  then  the  question  concerning  the  date  of  the  Council  of  Sar- 
dica would  be  most  accurately  decided.  As,  however,  this  preface  contains  mistakes  in 
several  places,  especially  chronological  errors — for  instance,  regarding  the  death  of  Constan- 
tine the  Great — we  cannot  unconditionally  accept  its  statement  as  to  the  date  344,  but  can 
only  do  so  when  it  corresponds  with  other  dates  concerning  that  time. 

Let  us,  at  all  events,  assume  that  Athanasius  came  to  Rome  about  Easter,  340.  As  is 
known,  he  was  there  for  three  whole  years,  and  in  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  year  was 
summoned  to  the  Emperor  Constans  at  Milan.  This  points  to  the  summer  of  343.  From 
thence  he  went  through  Gaul  to  Sardica,  and  thus  it  is  quite  possible  that  that  Synod  might 
have  begun  in  the  autumn  of  343.  It  probably  lasted,  however,  until  the  spring  ;  for  when 
the  two  envoys,  Euphrates  of  Cologne,  and  Vincent  of  Capua,  who  were  sent  by  the  Synod 
to  the  Emperor  Constans,  arrived  in  Antioch,  it  was  already  Easter  344.     Stephen,  the 


414  SARDICA.     A.D.  343  or  344 

bishop  of  the  latter  city,  treated  them  in  a  truly  diabolical  manner ;  but  his  wickedness 
soon  became  notorious,  and  a  synod  was  established,  which  deposed  him  after  Easter  344.  Its 
members  were  Eusebians,  who  therefore  appointed  Leontius  Castratus  as  Stephen's  succes- 
sor, and  it  is  indeed  no  other  than  this  assembly  which  Athanasius  has  in  mind,  when  he  says 
it  took  place  three  years  after  the  Synod  in  Encceniis,  and  drew  up  a  very  explicit  Eusebian 
confession  of  faith,  the  /xa«poorixo?. 

The  disgraceful  behaviour  of  Bishop  Stephen  of  Antioch  for  some  time  inclined  the  Em- 
peror to  place  less  confidence  in  the  Arian  party,  and  to  allow  Athanasius's  exiled  clergy 
to  return  home  in  the  summer  of  344.  Ten  months  later,  the  pseudo-bishop,  Gregory  of 
Alexandria,  died  (in  June,  345),  and  Constantius  did  not  permit  any  fresh  appointment  to 
the  see  of  Alexandria,  but  recalled  St.  Athanasius  by  three  letters,  and  waited  for  him  more 
than  a  year.  Thus  the  see  of  Alexandria  remained  unoccupied  for  more  than  a  year,  until 
the  last  six  months  of  346.     At  length,  in  October,  346,  Athanasius  returned  to  his  bishopric. 

We  see  then  that  by  accepting  the  distinct  statements  of  the  Paschal  Letters  of  St.  Atha- 
nasius and  the  preface,  we  obtain  a  satisfactory  chronological  system  in  which  the  separate  de- 
tails cohere  well  together,  and  which  thus  recommends  itself.  One  great  objection  which  we 
formerly  raised  ourselves  against  the  date  344  can  now  be  solved.  It  is  certainly  true  that  in 
353  or  354  Pope  Librius  wrote  thus  :  "Eight  years  ago  the  Eusebian  deputies,  Eudoxius  and 
Martyrius  (who  came  to  the  West  with  the  formula  /xaiipdcmKos),  refused  to  anathematize  the 
Arian  doctrine  at  Milan."  But  the  Synod  of  Milan  here  alluded  to,  and  placed  about  the 
year  345,  was  not,  as  we  before  erroneously  supposed,  held  before  the  Synod  of  Sardica,  but 
after  it.  We  are  somewhat  less  fortunate  as  regards  another  difficulty.  The  Eusebians  as- 
sembled at  Philippopolis  (the  pseudo-synod  of  Sardica)  say,  in  their  synodal  letter  :  "  Bishop 
Asclepas  of  Gaza  was  deposed  from  his  bishopric  seventeen  years  ago."  This  deposition  oc- 
curred at  an  Antiochian  synod.  If  we  identified  this  synod  with  the  well-known  one  of 
330,  by  which  Eustathius  of  Antioch  also  was  overthrown,  we  should,  reckoning  the  seventeen 
years,  have  the  year  346  or  347,  in  which  to  place  the  writing  of  the  Synodal  Letter  of  Phil- 
ippopolis, and  therefore  the  Synod  of  Sardica.  There  are,  however,  two  ways  of  avoiding  this 
conclusion,  either  we  must  suppose  that  Asclepas  has  been  already  deposed  a  year  or  so  be- 
fore the  Antiochian  Synod  of  330  ;  or  that  the  statement  as  to  the  number  seventeen  in  the 
Latin  translation  of  the  Synodal  Letter  of  Philippopolis  (for  we  no  longer  possess  the  orig- 
inal text)  is  an  error  or  slip  of  the  pen.  But  in  no  case  can  this  Synodal  Letter  alter  the 
fact  that  Athanasius  was  again  in  Alexandria  when  he  composed  his  Paschal  Letter  for  the 
year  347,  and  that  the  Synod  of  Sardica  must  therefore  have  been  held  several  years  before. 

NOTE  ON  THE  TEXT  OF  THE  CANONS. 

The  Canons  of  Sardica  have  come  down  to  us  both  in  Greek  and  Latin,  and  some  writers 
such  as  Richer  (Histoire  Cone.  Generate,  Tom.  i.,  p.  98),  have  been  of  opinion  that  the  Latin 
text  alone  was  the  original,  while  others,  such  as  Walch  (Gesch.  der  Kirchenvers.,  p.  179),  have 
arrived  at  a  directly  opposite  conclusion.  Now,  however,  chiefly  owing  to  the  investigations 
of  the  Ballerini  and  of  Spittler,  the  unanimous  opinion  of  scholars — so  says  Hefele — is  that 
the  canons  were  originally  drawn  up  in  both  languages,  intended  as  they  were  for  both 
Latins  and  Greeks.  I  may  perhaps  remind  the  reader  that  in  many  Western  collections  of 
canons  the  canons  of  Sardica  immediately  follow  those  of  Nice  without  any  break,  or  note 
that  they  were  not  enacted  at  that  council.  It  will  also  be  well  to  bear  in  mind  that  they 
were  received  by  the  Greeks  as  of  Ecumenical  authority  by  the  Council  in  Trullo,  and  as 
such  are  contained  in  the  body  of  the  Greek  Canon  Law. 

I  have  provided  the  reader  with  a  very  accurate  translation  of  each  text. 


THE  CANONS  OF  THE  COUNCIL  OF  SARDICA. 


The  holy  synod  assembled  in  Sardica  from  various  provinces  decreed  as  follows. 

(Found  in  Greek  in  John  of  Constantinople' s  collection  of  the  sixth  century  and  sev- 
eral other  MSS.  Found  also  in  the  icorks  of  the  Greek  scholiasts.  Found  in  Latin  in  the 
Prisca,  in  Dionysius  Exiguus,  and  in  Isidore,  genuine  and  fcdse.) 

CANON  I. 

{Greek.) 
Hosrus,  bishop  of  the  city  of  Corduba,  said  :  A  prevalent  evil,  or  rather  most  mis- 
chievous corruption  must  be  done  away  with  from  its  very  foundations.  Let  no 
bishop  be  allowed  to  remove  from  a  small  city  to  a  different  one  :  as  there  is  an 
obvious  reason  for  this  fault,  accounting  for  such  attempts ;  since  no  bishop  could  ever 
yet  be  found  who  endeavoured  to  be  translated  from  a  larger  city  to  a  smaller  one.  It 
is  therefore  evident  that  such  persons  are  inflamed  with  excessive  covetousness  and  are 
only  serving  ambition  in  order  to  have  the  repute  of  possessing  greater  authority.  Is  it 
then  the  pleasure  of  all  that  so  grave  an  abuse  be  punished  with  great  severity  ?  For 
I  think  that  men  of  this  sort  should  not  be  admitted  even  to  lay  communion.  All  the 
bishops  said :  It  is  the  pleasure  of  all. 

(Latin.) 
Bishop  Hosius  said :  A  prevalent  evil  and  mischievous  corruption  must  be  done 
away  with  from  its  foundation.  Let  no  bishop  be  allowed  to  remove  from  his  own  city 
to  another.  For  the  reason  of  such  attempts  is  manifest,  since  in  this  matter  no  bishop 
has  been  found  who  would  remove  from  a  larger  city  to  a  smaller  one.  It  is  therefore 
evident  that  these  men  are  inflamed  with  excess  of  covetousness,  and  are  serving  ambi- 
tion and  aiming  at  the  possession  of  power.  If  it  be  the  pleasure  of  all,  let  so  great  an 
evil  be  punished  right  harshly  and  sternly,  so  that  he  who  is  such  shall  not  even  be  ad- 
mitted to  lay  communion.     All  with  one  accord  answered  :  Such  is  our  pleasure. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  I. 


No  bishop  is  to  be  found  passing  from  a  smaller 
to  a  greater  city.  If  anyone  slioidd  move  from 
an  humble  to  a  more  important  see,  he  shall  be 
excommunicated  through  his  whole  life  as  proud 
and  grasping. 

Van  Espen. 
(Dissert,  hi  Synod.  Sard.,  §  II.1) 
What  Peter  de  Marca  says  (De  Concordia 
Sacerdotii  et  Imp.,  Lib.  V.,  cap.  iv.),  "Hosius 
presided  over  "  this  council  as  legate  of  the 
Roman  bishop,  rests  upon  no  solid  founda- 
tion, and  no  trace  of  any  such  legation  is 
found  in  Athanasius  or  in  any  of  the  other 


writers  who  treated  of  this  synod.  Moreover 
such  a  thing  is  contrary  to  the  form  of  sub- 
scription used.  For  of  those  who  signed  the 
first  is  Hosius,  and  Athanasius  designates 
him  simply  as  "  from  Spain,"  without  any  ad- 
dition ;  and  then  next  he  mentions  "  Julius  of 
Rome,  by  Archidamus  and  Philoxenus,  his 
presbyters,"  etc.  "What  is  clearer  than  that, 
by  the  testimony  of  Athanasius,  Julius  was 
present  by  these  two  presbyters  only,  and 
that  they  only  were  his  legates  or  vicars,  who 
in  his  room  were  present  at  this  synod  ? 

The  first  part  of  this  canon  is  found  in  the 
Corpus  Juris  Canonici ;  Raymund's  Decretales, 
De  Clericis  non  residentibus,  Cap.  ii. 


CANON  II. 

(Greek.) 
Bishop  Hosius  said  :  But  if  any  such  person  should  be  found  so  mad  or  audacious 
as  to  think  to  advance  by  way  of  excuse  an  affirmation  that  he  had  brought  letters  from 

1  The  who'.e  of  this  Dissertation  is  worthy  of  careful  study. 


416 


SARDICA.     A.D.  343  or  344 


the  people  [laity],  it  is  plain  that  some  few  persons,  corrupted  by  bribes  and  rewards, 
could  have  got  up  an  uproar  in  the  church,  demanding,  forsooth,  the  said  man  for 
bishop.  I  think  then  that  practices  and  devices  of  such  sort  absolutely  must  be  pun- 
ished, so  that  a  man  of  this  kind  be  deemed  unworthy  even  of  lay  communion  in  ex- 
tremis. Do  ye  therefore  make  answer  whether  this  sentence  is  approved  by  you.  They 
[the  bishops]  answered  :  What  has  been  said  is  approved  of. 

(Latin.) 

Bishop  Hosius  said  :  Even  if  any  such  person  should  show  himself  so  rash  as  per- 
haps to  allege  as  an  excuse  and  affirm  that  he  has  received  letters  from  the  people,  inas- 
much as  it  is  evident  that  a  few  persons  could  have  been  corrupted  by  rewards  and 
bribes — [namely]  persons  who  do  not  hold  the  pure  faith — to  raise  an  uproar  in  the 
church,  and  seem  to  ask  for  the  said  man  as  bishop  ;  I  judge  that  these  frauds  must  be 
condemned,  so  that  such  an  one  should  not  receive  even  lay  communion  at  the  last.  If 
ye  all  approve,  do  ye  decree  it.     The  synod  answered :  We  approve. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  II. 


If  anyone  shall  pass  from  one  city  to  another, 
and  shall  raise  up  seditions,  ticMing  tlie  people 
and  be  assisted  by  them  in  raising  a  disturbance, 
he  shall  not  be  allowed  communion  even  when 
dying. 

Van  Espen. 

To  understand  this  canon  aright  it  must  be 
remembered  that  in  the  first  ages  of  the 
Church  the  people  were  accustomed  to  have  a 
share  in  the  election  of  their  bishop  ;  and  he 
whom  the  people  demanded  was  usually  or- 
dained their  bishop. 

Aeistenus. 
This  [penalty]  is  something  unheard  of  and 
horrible,  that  he  should  not  be  deemed  worthy 
of  communion  even  at  the  hour  of  death  ;  for 
it  is  a  provision  found  nowhere  else  imposed 
by  any  canon,  nor  inflicted  upon  any  sin. 

Van  Espen. 
The  Greek  author  Aristenus  [in  the  above 
remarks]  probably  has  not  erred  from  the 
truth  when  he  asserts  that  to  no  crime  was 
this  penalty  attached,  if  he  refers  to  the  East- 
ern Churches ;  for  Morinus  himself  (in  the 
xixth  chapter  of  the  ixth  book,  De  Penitentia), 
confesses  that  this  penalty  was  never  attached 
to  any  crime  among  the  Easterns  :  neverthe- 
less in  some  Churches  in  the  first  ages  the 


three  crimes  of  idolatry,  murder,  and  adul- 
tery were  thus  punished  :  that  is,  that  to  those 
who  admitted  any  one  of  these,  reconciliation 
was  denied  even  at  his  death,  "and  this,"  says 
Morinus,  "  I  think  no  one  can  deny,  who  is  at 
all  versed  in  the  testimony  of  the  ancients  on 
this  point." 

Hefele. 
The  addition  in  the  Latin  text,  qui  sinceram 
fidem  non  liabent,  is  found  both  in  Dionysius 
Exiguus  and  in  Isidore  and  the  Prisca,  and  its 
meaning  is  as  follows  :  "  In  a  town,  some  few, 
especially  those  who  have  not  the  true  faith, 
can  be  easily  bribed  to  demand  this  or  that 
person  as  bishop."  The  Fathers  of  Sardica 
plainly  had  here  in  view  the  Arians  and  their 
adherents,  who,  through  such  like  machina- 
tions, when  they  had  gained  over,  if  only  a 
small  party  in  a  town,  sought  to  press  into 
the  bishoprics.  The  Synod  of  Antioch  more- 
over, in  341,  although  the  Eusebians,  properly 
speaking,  were  dominant  there,  had  laid  down 
in  the  twenty-first  canon  a  similar,  only  less 
severe,  rule. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Eaymond's  Decretales,  cap.  ii.,  De 
electione,  but  with  the  noteworthy  addition 
"unless  he  shall  have  repented."  These  words 
do  not  occur  in  the  other  Latin  versions,  and 
Hefele  thinks  them  to  have  been  added  by 
Raymond  of  Pennaforte. 


CANON  III. 

(Greek) 
Bishop  Hosius  said :  This  also  it  is  necessary  to  add, — that  no  bishop  pass  from  his 
own  province  to  another  province  in  which  there  are  bishops,  unless  indeed  he  be  called 
by  his  brethren,  that  we  seem  not  to  close  the  gates  of  charity. 


SARDICA.     A.D.  343  or  344 


417 


And  this  case  likewise  is  to  be  provided  for,  tliat  if  in  any  province  a  bishop  has  some 
matter  against  his  brother  and  fellow-bishop,  neither  of  the  two  should  call  in  as  arbiters 
bishops  from  another  province. 

But  if  perchance  sentence  be  given  against  a  bishop  in  any  matter  and  he  supposes 
his  case  to  be  not  unsound  but  good,  in  order  that  the  question  may  be  reopened,  let  us, 
if  it  seem  good  to  your  charity,  honour  the  memory  of  Peter  the  Apostle,  and  let  those 
who  gave  judgment  write  to  Julius,  the  bishop  of  Rome,  so  that,  if  necessary,  the  case 
may  be  retried  by  the  bishops  of  the  neighbouring  provinces  and  let  him  appoint  arbiters ; 
but  if  it  cannot  be  shown  that  his  case  is  of  such  a  sort  as  to  need  a  new  trial,  let  the 
judgment  once  given  not  be  annulled,  but  stand  good  as  before. 

(Latin.) 

Bishop  Hosius  said  :  This  also  it  is  necessary  to  add, — that  bishops  shall  not  pass 
from  their  own  province  to  another  province  in  which  there  are  bishops,  unless  perchance 
upon  invitation  from  their  brethren,  that  we  seem  not  to  close  the  door  of  charity. 

But  if  in  any  province  a  bishop  have  a  matter  in  dispute  against  his  brother  bishop, 
one  of  the  two  shall  not  call  in  as  judge  a  bishop  from  another  province. 

But  if  judgment  have  gone  against  a  bishop  in  any  cause,  and  he  think  that  he  has 
a  good  case,  in  order  that  the  question  may  be  reopened,  let  us,  if  it  be  your  pleasure, 
honour  the  memory  of  St.  Peter  the  Apostle,  and  let  those  who  tried  the  case  write  to 
Julius,  the  bishop  of  Borne,  and  if  he  shall  judge  that  the  case  should  be  retried,  let  that 
be  done,  and  let  him  appoint  judges ;  but  if  he  shall  find  that  the  case  is  of  such  a  sort 
that  the  former  decision  need  not  be  disturbed,  what  lie  has  decreed  shall  be  confirmed. 

Is  this  the  pleasure  of  all  ?     The  synod  answered,  It  is  our  pleasure. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  III. 
No  bishop,  unless  called  thereto,  shall  pass  to 
another  city.  Moreover  a  bishop  of  the  province 
who  is  engaged  in  any  litigation  shall  not  appeal 
to  outside  bishops.  But  if  Borne  hears  the  cause, 
even  outsiders  may  be  present. 

Van  Espen. 

According  to  the  reading  of  Dionj'sius  and 
Isidore,  as  well  as  of  the  Greeks,  Balsamon, 
Zonaras  and  Aristenus,  as  also  of  Hervetus 
the  provision  is  that  bishops  of  one  province 
shall  not  pass  to  another  in  which  there  are 
not  bishops. 

Zonaras. 

Not  only  are  bishops  prohibited  from  chang- 
ing their  cities,  and  passing  from  a  smaller  to 
a  larger  one,  but  also  from  passing  from  one 
province  to  another  in  which  there  are  bishops, 
for  the  sake  of  doing  any  ecclesiastical  work 
there  unless  they  are  called  by  the  bishops  of 
that  province. 

On  the  phrase  "  if  it  pleases  you  "  the  fol- 
lowing from  St.  Athanasius  is  much  to  the 
point  (cit.  by  Pusey,  Councils,  p.  143).  "They 
[i.e.,  the  Council  of  Nice]  wrote  concerning 
Easter,  'It  seemed  good' as  follows:  for  it 
did  then  seem  good,  that  there  should  be  a 
general  compliance  ;  but  about  the  faith  they 


wrote  not '  It  seemed  good,'  but '  Thus  believes 
the  Catholic  Church ' ;  and  thereupon  they 
confessed  how  the  faith  lay,  in  order  to  shew 
that  their  sentiments  were  not  novel,  but 
apostolic." 

TlLLEMONT. 

This  form  is  very  strong  to  shew  that  it  was 
a  right  which  the  Pope  had  not  had  hitherto. 

Van  Espen. 

Peter  cle  Marca  (De  Concordia  Sacerdotii  et 
Imperii,  Lib.  VII.,  Cap.  iij.,  §  8)  says  that  Ho- 
sius here  proposed  to  the  fathers  to  honour 
the  memory  of  St.  Peter  that  he  might  the 
more  easily  lead  them  to  consent  to  this  new 
privilege  ;  for,  as  De  Marca  has  proved,  the 
right  here  bestowed  upon  the  Roman  Pontiff 
was  clearly  unknown  before. 

It  has  been  urged  that  the  mention  of  the 
pope  by  name,  intimates  clearly  that  the  pro- 
vision of  these  canons  of  an  appeal  to  Rome 
was  of  a  purely  temporary  character ;  and 
some  famous  authors  such  as  Edmund  Richer, 
of  the  Sorbonue,  have  written  in  defence  of 
this  view,  but  Hefele  quotes  with  great  force 
the  words  of  the  learned  Protestant,  Spittler 
(Critical  Examination  of  the  Sardican  Decisions. 
Spittler,  Sammtlichen  Wcrften,  P,  viij.,  p. 
129  sq.). 


VOL.    XIV. 


e  e 


418 


SARDICA.     A.D.  343  or  344 


Spittleb. 
It  is  said  that  these  Sardican  decisions  were 
simply  provisional,  and  intended  for  the  pres- 
ent necessity  ;  because  Athanasius,  so  hardly 
pressed  by  the  Arians,  could  only  be  rescued 
by  authorizing  an  appeal  to  the  Bishop  of 
Rome  for  a  final  judgment.  Richei",  in  his 
History  of  the  General  Councils,  has  elaborately 
defended  this  opinion,  and  Horix  also  has  de- 
clared in  its  favour.  But  would  not  all  secure 
use  of  the  canons  of  the  councils  be  done  away 
with  if  this  distinction  between  provisional 
and  permanent  synodal  decisions  were  ad- 
mitted ?  Is  there  any  sure  criterion  for  dis- 
tinguishing those  canons  which  were  only  to 
be  provisional,  from  the  others  which  were 
made  for  all  future  centuries  ?  The  Fathers 
of  the  Synod  of  Sardica  express  themselves 
quite  generally  ;  is  it  not  therefore  most  ar- 
bitrary on  our  part  to  insert  limitations?  It 
is  beyond  question  that  these  decisions  were 
occasioned  by  the  very  critical  state  of  the 
affairs  of  Athanasius  ;  but  is  everything  only 
provisional  that  is  occasioned  by  the  circum- 
stances of  individuals  ?  In  this  way  the  most 
important  of  the  ancient  canons  might  be  set 
aside. 


Hefele. 
According  to  the  Greek  text,  and  that  of 
Dionysius,  those   who  had  pronounced  the 
first  judgment  were  to  write  to  Rome  ;  and 
Fuchs  rightly  adds,  that  they  were  to  do  this 
at  the  desire  of  the  condemned.    But,  accord- 
ing to  Isidore  and  the  Prisca,  the  right  or  the 
duty  of  bringing  the  affair  before  Rome,  also 
belonged  to  the   neighbouring  bishops.      I 
believe  that  the  last  interpretation  has  only 
arisen  through  a  mistake,  from   a  comment 
belonging  to  the  next  sentence  being  inserted 
in  the  wrong  place.     It  only  remains  to  be 
remarked  here,  that   Isidore  and  the  Prisca 
have  not  the  name  Julio,     .     .     .     But  Har- 
i  douin's  conjecture,  that  instead  of  Julio,  per- 
I  haps  illi  may  be  read,  is  entirely  gratuitous, 
I  contrary  to  the  Greek  text,  and  plainly  only 
a  stratagem  against  the  Gallicans. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
!  Cunonici,  Gratian's  Dceretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa 
!  VI.,  Qntest.  iv.,  Canon  j.  7,  in  Isidore's  ver- 
sion. Dionysius's  version  is  quite  wrong  as 
given  by  Justellus  and  in  the  Munich  edition, 
'  changing  the  negative  into  the  affirmative  in 
i  the  phrase  ne  xinus  de  duobus. 


CANON  IV. 

(Greek) 

Bishop  Gaudentius  said :  If  it  seems  good  to  you,  it  is  necessary  to  add  to  this 
decision  full  of  sincere  charity  which  thou  hast  pronounced,  that l  if  any  bishop  be 
deposed  by  the  sentence  of  these  neighbouring  bishops,  and  assert  that  he  has  fresh 
matter  in  defence,  a  new  bishop  be  not  settled  in  his  see,  unless  the  bishop  of  Home 
judge  and  render  a  decision  as  to  this. 

(Latin.) 

Bishop  Gaudentius  said  :  It  ought  to  be  added,  if  it  be  your  pleasure,  to  this  sen- 
tence full  of  sanctity  which  thou  hast  pronounced,  that — when  .any  bishop  has  been 
deposed  by  the  judgment  of  those  bishops  who  have  sees  in  neighbouring  places,  and 
he  [the  bishop  deposed]  shall  announce  that  his  case  is  to  be  examined  in  the  city  of 
Rome — that  no  other  bishop  shall  in  any  wise  be  ordained  to  his  see,  after  the  appeal  of 
him  who  is  apparently  deposed,  unless  the  case  shall  have  been  determined  in  the 
judgment  of  the  Roman  bishop. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  IV. 
If  a  bishop  has  been  deposed  and  affirms  tJiat 
lie  has  an  excuse  to  urge,  unless  Borne  lias  judged 
the  case,  no  bishop  shall  be  appointed  in  his  room. 
For  he  might  treat  the  decree  with  scorn  either 
through  his  nuncios  or  by  his  letters. 

There    are    two    distinct    understandings 
of   this   canon.      The   one   view  is  that  the 


"  neighbours  "  of  this  canon  are  the  same  as 
the  "neighbours"  of  the  preceding  canon 
(number  iij.)  and  that  the  meaning  of  this 
canon  therefore  is — If  the  court  of  second  ins- 
tance, consisting  of  the  bishops  of  the  neigh- 
bouring province,  has  pronounced  the  accused 
guilty,  he  still  has  one  more  appeal  to  a  third 
court,  viz.,  Rome.  This  is  the  view  taken  by 
the  Greeks,  Zonaras  and  Balsamon,  by  the 


1  At  this  point  begins  the  Greek  text  as  given  in  Bev. 


SARDICA.     A.D.  343  or  344  410 


In  direct  opposition  to  this  is  the  viewthat  ^^SR^^S*^? 
there  is  no  third  but  only  a  second  appeal  tion,  as  to  "what  was  to  be  don  Z  Z 
mentioned  by  the  canon.     The  supporters  of ,  bishop's  see."  mth  the 

tins  interpretation  are  Peter  de  Marca  Tille- 1      3    "fiv.vti,0v  +!,„+•+•         -.     i       •  •,     „ 

fele  snles  ami  states  Ins  reasons  for  doing  so.  (hood  of  the  said  Province "  that!  Sdfed  this 

Hefele  J  identification   is    throughout   unwarrantable 

There  must  be  added  to'  the  reasons  of  the   ^^Vt?  Z^Z^tS^  £ 

1.  That  it  certainly  would  be  very  curious       4    That   bv   tlii«   i«fow™+h+-  w  • 

■f  m  the  third  canon  mention  was^ade  of  clearness'  ZJZg'Stg^  °>g 

three  canons. 

5.  That  the  word  tto'Xw  in  the  fourth  canon 
presents  no  difficulty;  for  even  one  who  has 
only  been  heard  in  the  court  of  first  instance 
may  say  he  desires  again  to  defend  himself, 
because  he  has  already  made  his  first  defence 
m  the  court  of  first  instance. 


„„„  „„„  made  of 

tne  appeal  to  Rome  as  following  the  judg- 
ment of  the  court  of  first  instance ;  in  the 
fourth,  after  that  of  the  court  of  second 
instance;  and  again  in  the  fifth,  after  the 
judgment  of  the  court  of  first  instance. 
_  2.  That  if  the  Synod  had  really  intended  to 
institute  a  court  of  third  instance,  it  would 


CANON  V. 
(Greek) 
Bishop  Hosius  said:  Decreed,  that  if  any  bishop  is  accused,  and  the  bishom  of 

heard  yet  again,  and  at  his  request  it  seem  good  to  move  the  Sno  1i      in         i 
presbyters  a  latere  let  it  be  in  the  power  of  fhat  bishop,  J£rtZ j  2fc  inSes   t  to  be 

The  bishops  answered :  What  has  been  said  is  approved. 


(Latin.) 

HOP     HOSTTTS  Rflirl  •    "FYivflia-..  /-1™,.„ 

of  that 


iTZ^°SIXJSSf!:  Fu^er  decr1eed'  tliat  if  a  bisll°P  is  reused,  and  the  bishops 

Ef  Wm  it    i  g'    V  ■}   fc  n?ht  that  the  tml  or  examination  of  his  case  be  renewed 

treat  mo  P  it  T^li         iV*  h\*ho  f ks  to  have  llis  case  ^ard,  shall  by  his  en? 

aXStvTv'»h0  SlitU  ^P-^^be  .judges  withPthe'bisholslntlf  1VS 
belie™  L^ThHl6y  "T  a?P°nted.  «  ^all  be  as  he  shall  choose.     But  if  he 


e  e 


■120  SARDICA.     A.D.  343  OB  344 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  oe  Canon  V. 
[Lacking.] 

This  Canon  isvij.  of  Isidore's  collection. 

Van  Espen. 


were  sent  by  the  Roman  bishop  from  his  side 
(a  latere)  or  the  bishops  who  were  appointed, 
ought,  together  with  the  bishops  of  the  prov- 
ince who  had  given  the  former  sentence,  to 
give  a  fresh  judgment  and  declare  their  sen- 
tence. And  this  Hincmar  of  Rheims  was  the 
first  to  notice  in  his   letters  in  the  name  of 


Here  there  is  properly  speaking  no   pro-   Charles  the  Bald  sent  to  John  VIII. 
vision  for  "  appeal,"  which  entirely  suspends  j 

[i.e.  by  the  canon  law]  the  execution  and  This  view  is  supported  with  his  accustomed 
effect  of  the  first  sentence  ;  but  rather  for  a  learning  and  acumen  by  Du  Pin,  Be  Antiqua 
revision  of  judgment     .     .     .     . ;  those  who  I  Eccl.  Disevplina,  Diss.  II.,  Cap.  I.,  Sec.  3. 

CANON  VI. 

(Greek) 

Bishop  Hosius  said  :  If  it  happen  that  in  a  province  in  which  there  are  very  many 
bishops  one  bishop  should  stay  away  and  by  some  negligence  should  not  come  to  the 
council  and  assent  to  the  appointment  made  by  the  bishops,  but  the  people  assemble 
and  pray  that  the  ordination  of  the  bishop  desired  by  them  take  place — it  is  necessary 
that  the  bishop  who  stayed  away  should  first  be  reminded  by  letters  from  the  exarch  of 
the  province  (I  mean,  of  course,  the  bishop  of  the  metropolis),  that  the  people  demand 
a  pastor  to  be  given  them.  I  think  that  it  is  well  to  await  his  [the  absent  bishop's]  ar- 
rival also.  But  if  after  summons  by  letter  he  does  not  come,  nor  even  write  in  reply, 
the  wish  of  the  people  ought  to  be  complied  with. 

The  bishops  from  the  neighbouring  provinces  also  should  be  invited  to  the  ordina- 
tion of  the  bishop  of  the  metropolis. 

It  is  positively  not  permitted  to  ordain  a  bishop  in  a  village  or  petty  town,  for 
which  even  one  single  presbyter  is  sufficient  (for  there  is  no  necessity  to  ordain  a  bishop 
there)  lest  the  name  and  authority  of  bishop  should  be  made  of  small  account,  but  the 
bishops  of  the  province  ought,  as  before  said,  to  ordain  bishops  in  those  cities  in  which 
there  were  bishops  previously ;  and  if  a  city  should  be  found  with  a  population  so  large 
as  to  be  thought  worthy  of  an  episcopal  see,  let  it  receive  one. 

Is  this  the  pleasure  of  all  ?     All  answered :  It  is  our  pleasure. 

(Latin.) 

Bishop  Hosius  said :  If  it  shall  have  happened,  that  in  a  province  in  which  there 
have  been  very  man}-  bishops,  one  [i.e.,  but  one]  bishoj)  remains,  but  that  he  by  negli- 
gence has  not  chosen  [to  ordain]  a  bishop,  and  the  people  have  made  application,  the 
bishops  of  the  neighbouring  province  ought  first  to  address  [by  letter]  the  bishop  who 
resides  in  that  province,  and  show  that  the  people  seek  a  ruler  [i.e.,  pastor]  for  them- 
selves and  that  this  is  right,  so  that  they  also  may  come  and  with  him  ordain  a  bishop. 
But  if  he  refuses  to  acknowledge  their  written  communication,  and  leaves  it  unnoticed, 
and  writes  no  reply,  the  people's  request  should  be  satisfied,  so  that  bishops  should 
come  from  the  neighbouring  province  and  ordain  a  bishop. 

But  permission  is  not  to  be  given  to  ordain  a  bishop  either  in  any  village,  or  in  an 
unimportant  city,  for  which  one  presbj'ter  suffices,  lest  the  name  and  authority  of  bishop 
grow  cheap.  Those  [bishops]  who  are  invited  from  another  province  ought  not  to  or- 
dain a  bishop  unless  in  the  cities  which  have  [previously]  had  bishops,  or  in  a  city 
which  is  so  important  or  so  populous  as  to  be  entitled  to  have  a  bishop. 

Is  this  the  pleasure  of  all '?     The  synod  replied  :  It  is  our  pleasure. 


SARDIOA.     A.D.  343  on  344 


421 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VI. 


If  the  bishops  were  present  when  the  people 
were  seeking  for  a  bishop,  and  one  teas  away,  let 
that  one  be  called.  But  if  he  is  willing  to  an- 
swer the  call  neither  by  letter  nor  in  person,  let 
him  be  ordained  whom  they  desire. 

When  a  Metropolitan  is  appointed  the  neigh- 
bouring bishops  are  to  be  sent  for. 

In  a  little  city  and  town,  for  which  one  pres- 
byter suffices,  a  bishop  is  not  to  be  appointed. 
But  if  the  city  be  very  populous,  it  is  not  unfit- 
ting to  do  so. 

The  second  portion  of  this  canon  is  entirely 
lacking  in  the  Latin.  The  Greek  scholiasts, 
Zonaras,  Balsamon,  and  Aristenus,  under- 
stand this  to  mean  "  that  '  at  the  appointment 
of  a  metropolitan  the  bishops  of  the  neigh- 
bouring provinces  shall  also  be  invited,'  prob- 
ably to  give  greater  solemnity  to  the  act,"  so 
says  Hefele.  And  to  this  agree  Van  Espen, 
Tillemont,  and  Herbst. 

The  first  part  in  the  Greek  and  Latin  have 
different  meanings ;  the  Greek  text  contem- 
plating the  case  of  one  bishop  stopping  away 
from  a  meeting  of  bishops  for  an  election  to 
fill  a  vacancy  ;  the  Latin  text  the  case  of  there 
being  only  one  bishop  left  in  a  province  (after 
war,  pestilence,  or  the  like).  This  second 
meaning  is  accepted  by  Van  Espen,  Christian 
Lupus  and  others.  Moreover,  it  would  seem 
from  Flodoard's  History  of  the  Church  of 
Bheims  (Geschichte  dcr  Bheimscr  Kirchc,  Lib. 
III.,  c.  20  [a  book  I  have  never  seen] )  that 
the  Gallican  Church  acted  upon  this  under- 
standing of  this  canon.  It  is  that  also  of 
Gratian. 

Between  the  Latin  and  the  Greek  text 
stands  the  interpretation  of  Zonaras,  which  is 
that  if  a  province  once  having  many  bishops 


has  by  any  contingency  only  one  left  besides 
the  Metropolitan,  and  he  neglects  to  be  present 
at  the  consecration  of  the  new  bishops,  he  is 
to  be  summoned  by  letter  of  the  Metropolitan, 
and  if  he  does  not  then  come,  the  consecra- 
tions are  to  go  on  without  him.  With  this 
explanation  Harmenopulus  also  agrees,  add- 
ing further  that  the  Metropolitan  might  alone 
consecrate  the  bishops,  resting  his  argument 
on  the  words  to  Ikovov  k.t.X. 

Some  scholars  have  supposed  that  neither 
the  present  Greek  nor  the  present  Latin  text 
represent  the  original,  but  that  the  Greek 
text  is  nearest  to  it,  but  must  be  corrected  by 
an  ancient  Latin  version  found  by  Maffei  in  a 
codex  at  Verona.  The  Ballerini  have  devoted 
careful  attention  to  this  point  in  their  notes 
to  the  Works  of  St.  Leo  the  Great  (Tom.  iii., 
p.  xxxij.  4).  It  would  seem  that  this  might 
be  the  canon  quoted  by  the  fathers  of  Con- 
stantinople in  382,  and  if  so,  it  would  seem 
that  they  had  a  Greek  text  like  that  from 
which  the  Verona  version  was  made. 

Van  Espen. 
The  fathers  of  Sardica  [in  the  second  part 
of  this  canon,  which  is  Canon  VII.  by  the 
Latin  computation]  decreed  two  things  :  first, 
that  where  the  people  justly  asked  for  a  Pas- 
tor to  be  ordained  for  them,  their  demand 
should  be  complied  with  ;  but  where  the  peo- 
ple insisted  upon  having  a  bishop  ordained 
for  a  village  or  little  city,  for  which  one  pres- 
byter was  all  that  was  needed,  no  attention 
should  be  paid  to  their  demands,  lest  the 
name  and  authority  of  a  bishop  should  become 
despicable. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Dccretum,  P,  I.,  Distinc. 
lxv.,  c.  ix. 


CANON  VII. 

(Greek) 

Bishop  Hosius  said :  Our  importunity  and  great  pertinacity  and  unjust  petitions 
have  brought  it  about  that  Ave  do  not  have  as  much  favour  and  confidence  as  we  ought 
to  enjoy.  For  many  of  the  bishops  do  not  intermit  resorting  to  the  imperial  Court, 
especially  the  Africans,  who,  as  we  have  learned  from  our  beloved  brother  and  fellow- 
bishop,  Gratus,  do  not  accept  salutary  counsels,  but  so  despise  them  that  one  man 
carries  to  the  Court  petitions  many  and  diverse  and  of  no  possible  benefit  to  the  Church, 
and  does  not  (as  ought  to  be  done  and  as  is  fitting)  assist  and  help  the  poor  and  the 
laity  or  the  widows,  but  is  intriguing  to  obtain  worldly  dignities  and  offices  for  certain 
persons.  This  evil  then  causes  enfeeblement  [better,  murmuring  (read  TovSpvafj,6v  or 
TovSopvo-fiov)],  not   without  some  scandal  and  blame  to  us.     But  I  account  it  quite 


SARDICA.     A.D.  343  or  344 


proper  for  a  bishop  to  give  assistance  to  oue  oppressed  by  some  one,  or  to  a  widow 
suffering  injustice,  or,  again,  an  orphan  robbed  of  his  estate,  always  provided  that  these 
persons  have  a  just  cause  of  petition. 

If,  then,  beloved  brethren,  this  seems  good  to  all,  do  ye  decree  that  no  bishop  shall 
go  to  the  imperial  Court  except  those  whom  our  most  pious  emperor  may  summon  by 
his  own  letters.  Yet  since  it  often  happens  that  persons  condemned  for  their  offences 
to  deportation  or  banishment  to  an  island,  or  who  have  received  some  sentence  or 
other,  beg  for  mercy  and  seek  refuge  with  the  Church  [i.e.,  take  sanctuary],  such  per- 
sons are  not  to  be  refused  assistance,  but  pardon  should  be  asked  for  them  without 
delay  and  without  hesitation.  If  this,  then,  is  also  your  pleasure,  do  ye  all  vote 
assent. 

All  gave  answer :  Be  this  also  decreed. 

(Latin.) 

Bishop  Hosius  said :  Importunities  and  excessive  pertinacity  and  unjust  petitions 
have  caused  us  to  have  too  little  favour  or  confidence,  while  certain  bishops  cease  not 
to  go  to  the  Court,  especially  the  Africans,  who  (as  we  have  learned)  spurn  and  con- 
temn the  salutary  counsels  of  our  most  holy  brother  and  fellow-bishop,  Gratus,  so  that 
they  not  only  bring  to  the  Court  many  and  diverse  petitions  (not  for  the  good  of  the 
Church  nor,  as  is  usual  and  right,  to  succour  the  poor  or  widows  or  orphans),  but  even 
seek  to  obtain  worldly  dignities  and  offices  for  certain  persons.  This  evil  therefore 
stirs  up  at  times  not  only  murmurings,  but  even  scandals.  But  it  is  proper  that 
bishops  should  intercede  for  persons  suffering  from  violence  and  oppression,  afflicted 
widows  and  defrauded  orphans,  provided,  nevertheless,  that  these  persons  have  a  just 
cause  or  petition. 

If,  then,  brethren  dearly  beloved,  such  be  your  pleasure,  do  we  decree  that  no 
bishops  go  to  the  Court  except  those  who  may  have  been  invited  or  summoned  by 
letters  of  the  God-fearing  emperor.  But  since  it  often  happens  that  those  who  are 
suffering  from  injustice  or  who  are  condemned  for  their  offences  to  deportation  or  ban- 
ishment to  an  island,  or,  in  short,  have  received  some  sentence  or  other,  seek  refuge 
with  the  mercy  of  the  Church,  such  persons  should  be  succoured  and  pardon  be 
begged  for  them  without  hesitation.     Decree  this,  therefore,  if  it  be  your  pleasure. 

All  said :  It  is  our  pleasure  and  be  it  decreed. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VII. 


Wlien  an  orphan,  %vidow,  and  other  desolate 
persons  are  oppressed  by  force  let  the  bishop  give 
them  succour  and  approach  the  JEmpcror  ;  but 
through  a  pretext  of  this  kind  let  him  not  be  a 
hanger  on  of  the  camp,  but  rather  let  him  send  ' 
a  deacon. 

Van  Espen. 

The    ';  salutary    counsels "    (salutaria    con- 
silia)  here  seem  to  be  synodieal  admonitions,  | 
as  Zonaras  notes  ;  and  these  might  well  be  ■■ 
ascribed  to  Gratus,  the  bishop  of  Carthage, 
because   many  of   the   African   synods   were 
held  under  his  presidency  and  direction. 

Nothing  is  more  noteworthy  than  how  from  ' 
the  first  princes  summoned  bishops  in  coun- 1 
sel  with  regard  to  affairs  touching  either  the 
estate  of  the  Church  or  of  the  Realm  ;  and 


called  them  to  their  presence  in  urgent  and 
momentous  cases,  and  kept  them  with  them. 

Justinian,  the  emperor,  in  his  Novels  (Chap- 
ter II.)  defines  that  no  one  of  the  God-beloved 
bishops  shall  dare  to  be  absent  any  more 
from  his  diocese  for  a  whole  year,  and  adds 
this  exception,  "  unless  he  does  so  on  account 
of  an  imperial  jussio  ;  in  this  case  alone  he 
shall  be  held  to  be  without  blame." 

On  this  whole  matter  of  bishops  interced- 
ing for  culprits,  and  especially  for  those  con- 
demned to  death,  see  St.  Augustine  (Epist. 
153  ad  Macedonium). 

With  this  canon  may  be  compared  Canon 
VII.  of  the  Council  of  Rheims  in  a.d.  630. 

This  canon  is  found  in  part  in  the  Corpus 
Juris  Canonici,  Gratian's  Dccretum,  P.  II., 
Causa  xxiij.,  Quoest.  viij.,  c.  xxviij. 


SAKDICA.     A.D.  343  or  344  m 


CANON  VIII. 

(Greek.) 

Bishop  Hosius  said :  This  also  let  your  sagacity  determine  that »    i^^^i        «  • 
was  decreed  in  order  that  a  bishop  might  not  foil  tTwS «  —inasmuch  as  this 

(Latin.) 

ye  wlgSSe  Tntf  ffttg  5f  1  ^  'f~--™h  as 
be  observed]  to  go  to  Court  TOosoevei thevefo™ 1%  iblshops  mlg-ht  uot  labolu'  [»''. 
as  we  haveVLned  above^E'send  Si'SX  a'dlXo?  MsT  SUC" 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VIII. 
[Lacking.] 


Van  Espen. 
This  decree  is   threefold.     First,  that  the 
bishop  in  going  to  Court  should  not  fall  un- 

(1Ar    sncnimnn     oitbni,    „i    n l     -„        pi- 


to  obtain  some  cause  of  his  own.  Second, 
according  to  the  interpretation  of  Zonaras 
that  no  one  should  be  angry  with  the  Min- 
ister or  Deacon  who  tarried  in  camp,  as  the 
bishop  had  departed  thence."  And  third, 
that  the  Minister  could  carry  away  what  he 
td  iSl^^^0-^  toZonaras), 


der  suspicion  either  at  Court  or  of  his  own     he   ktters    oi     h    "^j"001*^  *?  Z°nai'aS>' 
people  that  he  was  approaching  the  J^tS^T^^^^k^^  *" 


CANON  IX. 
(Greek.) 


our  brethren  and  fellow-bishops,  U^O^Ab^J^S  KT^V0 
gg  through  his  deacon  and  nfove  fee  [jrie^t  ^^S^LSE^  £ 

o^=  Sf shXend  £  »oi«-^^^  -JWiTS 
was  most^'pt^  ""^  anS"'e1'  U"1  SUch  ™S  their  P1"""  "*  «»*  the  regulation 

to  "twS  feU^rsh^Zfwho T  PTYinCe  WshT  Slla11  ™*  *•«*«- 
metropolitan!  should   Spafcl  1  deZn  lit      rf6  "'  the.  metropolis  he  [the 

1  Here  the  Greek  text  begins  as  given  brBev  "  Tu       HTT; — ; - 

i,  ua  a«  b»eu  Dy  ise\ .  ;  Here  the  Greek  test  in  Bev.  begins. 


424 


SARDIOA.     A.D.  343  or  344 


dent  in  those  regions  and  cities  in  which  the  fortunate  and  blessed  Emperor  is  ruling 
the  State. 

If  however  a  bishop  who  seeks  to  obtain  some  petition  (a  worthy  one,  that  is)  has 
friends  in  the  palace,  he  is  not  forbidden  to  make  his  request  through  his  deacon  and 
to  advise  those  who,  he  knows,  can  kindly  intercede  for  him  in  his  absence. 

X.  But  let  those  who  come  to  Rome,  deliver,  as  before  said,  to  our  most  holy 
brother  and  fellow-bishop,  the  bishop  of  the  Roman  church,  the  petitions  which  they 
bear,  that  he  also  may  examine  whether  they  are  worthy  and  just,  and  let  him  give  dili- 
gence and  care  that  they  be  forwarded  to  the  Court. 

All  said  that  such  was  their  pleasure  and  that  the  regulation  was  proper. 

Bishop  Alypius  said  :  If  they  have  incurred  the  discomforts  of  travel  for  the  sake 
of  orphans  and  widows  or  any  in  distress  and  having  cases  that  are  not  unjust,  they 
"will  have  some  good  reason  [for  their  journey]  ;  but  now  since  they  chiefly  make 
requests  which  cannot  be  granted  without  envy  and  reproach,  it  is  not  necessary  for 
them  to  go  to  Court. 

NOTE. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  IX. 

If  one  brother  sends  to  another,  let  the  Metro- 
politan fortify  the  nuncio  loith  letters ;  and  let 
him  write  to  the  bishops,  who  have  the  matter  in 
hand,  to  protect  the  nuncio. 

Here  the  Latin  is  not  only  a  translation 
but  an  interpretation  of  the  Greek  text,  for  it 
distinctly  says  that  every  bishop  shall  send 
the  petition  he  intends  to  present  at  court 
first  to  his  Metropolitan,  who  shall  send  it  in. 
This  is  not  clearly  in  the  Greek,  and  yet  the 
Greek  Commentators  find  it  there. 

Christian  Lupus. 

The  authority  of  the  bishop  alone  is  not 
sufficient  to  send  a  deacon  to  Court,  there 
must  be  added  the  judgment  of  the  Metro- 
politan who  shall  examine  the  petition,  ap- 
prove, sign,  and  commend  it,  not  only  to  the 
Prince,  but  also  to  the  bishop  in  whose  dio- 
cese he  may  happen  to  be. 

Hefele. 

Zonaras,  Balsamon,  and  Aristenus  ex- 
plained this  canon  somewhat  differently, 
thus:  "If  a  bishop  desires  to  send  his  peti- 
tions addressed  to  ihe  Emperor  to  the  bishop 
of  the  town  where  the  Emperor  is  staying,  he 


shall  first  send  them  to  the  Metropolitan  of 
that  province  (according  to  Aristenus,  his  own 
Metropolitan)  and  the  latter  shall  send  his 
own  deacon  with  letters  of  recommendation 
to  the  bishop  or  bishops  who  may  be  at  court." 
This  difference  rests  upon  the  various  mean- 
ings of  "  to  the  brother  and  f ellow-bishop  "  in 
the  beginning  of  the  canon.  "We  understand 
by  this  his  own  Metropolitan,  and  treat  the 
words  :  o  ev  tjj  /j,el£ovi  k.  t.  A.,  as  a  more  exact 
definition  of  "  fellow-bishop,"  and  the  parti- 
ciple Tuyxavcov  as  equivalent  to  Tvyxavu,  and 
make  the  principal  clause  begin  at  ambs  nal 
tov  SuLkovov.  Beveridge  translated  the  canon 
in  the  same  way.  Zonaras  and  others,  on  the 
contrary,  understood  by  "  fellow-bishop,"  the 
bishop  of  the  Emperor's  residence  for  the 
time  being,  and  regarded  the  words  6  iv  rfj 
lienor]  k.t.\.  not  as  a  clearer  definition  of  what 
had  gone  before,  but  as  the  principal  clause, 
in  the  sense  of  "  then  the  Metropolitan  shall," 
etc.  According  to  this  interpretation,  the 
words  conveying  the  idea  that  the  bishop 
must  have  recourse  to  the  Metropolitan  are 
entirely  wanting  in  the  canon. 

The  first  part  of  this  Canon  is  the  last  part 
of  Canon  IX.  of  the  Latin.  The  last  part  is 
Canon  X.  of  the  Latin,  but  the  personal  part 
about  Alypius  is  omitted  from  the  Greek. 


CANON  X. 

(Greek) 

Bishop  Hosius  said :  This  also  I  think  necessary.1  Ye  should  consider  with  all 
thoroughness  and  care,  that  if  some  rich  man  or  professional  advocate  be  desired  for 
bishop,  he  be  not  ordained  until  he  have  fulfilled  the  ministry  of  reader,  deacon,  and 
presbyter,  in  order  that,   passing  by  promotion  through  the  several  grades,  he  may 


1  Here  the  Greek  begins  (reading  aci  for  ira  and  (ffeTdffo-flai  for  e|eTd£oiTo)  according  to  Beveridge. 


SAEDICA.     A.D.  343  or  344 


425 


advance  (if,  that  is,  lie  be  found  worthy)  to  the  height  of  the  episcopate.  And  he  shall 
remain  in  each  order  assuredly  for  no  brief  time,  that  so  his  faith,  his  reputable  life, 
his  steadfastness  of  character  and  considerateness  of  demeanour  may  be  well-known, 
and  that  he,  being  deemed  worthy  of  the  divine  sacerdotal  office  [sacerdotium,  i.e.,  the 
episcopate],  may  enjoy  the  highest  honour.  For  it  is  not  fitting,  nor  does  discipline  or 
good  conversation  allow  to  proceed  to  this  act  rashly  or  lightly,  so  as  to  ordain  a  bishop 
or  presbyter  or  deacon  hastily ;  as  thus  he  would  rightly  be  accounted  a  novice,  especi- 
ally since  also  the  most  blessed  Apostle,  he  who  was  the  teacher  of  the  Gentiles,  is  seen 
to  have  forbidden  hasty  ordinations ;  for  the  test  of  [even]  the  longest  period  will  not 
unreasonably  be  required  to  exemplify  the  conversation  and  character  of  each  [candi- 
date] . 

All  said  that  this  was  their  pleasure  and  that  it  must  be  absolutely  irreversible. 

(Latin.) 

Bishop  Hosius  said :  This  also  I  think  it  necessary  for  you  to  consider  most  care- 
fully, that  if  perchance  some  rich  man  or  professional  advocate  or  ex-official  be  desired 
for  bishop,  he  be  not  ordained  until  he  have  fulfilled  the  ministry  of  a  reader  and  the 
office  of  deacon  and  presbyter,  and  so  ascend,  if  he  have  shown  himself  worthy,  through 
the  several  grades  to  the  height  of  the  episcopate.  For  by  these  promotions  which  in 
any  case  take  a  considerable  length  of  time  can  be  tested  his  faith,  his  discretion,  his 
gravity  and  modesty.  And  if  he  be  found  worthy,  let  him  be  honoured  with  the  divine 
sacerdotal  office  [i.e.  the  episcopate] .  For  it  is  not  fitting,  nor  does  order  or  discipline 
allow,  that  one  be  rashly  or  lightly  ordained  bishop,  presbyter  or  deacon,  who  is  a 
novice,  especially  since  also  the  blessed  Apostle,  the  teacher  of  the  Gentiles,  is  seen 
to  have  expressly  forbidden  it.  But  those  [should  be  ordained]  whose  life  has  been 
tested  and  their  merit  approved  by  length  of  time. 

All  said  that  this  was  their  pleasure. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  X, 
No  lawyer,  teacher,  or  gentleman  (iXouVw;) 
shall  be  made  a  bishop  without  passing  through 
the  holy  orders.  Nor  shall  the  space  of  time 
between  the  orders  be  made  too  brief,  that  there 
may  be  a  better  proof  of  his  faith  and  good  con- 
versation.    For  otherwise  he  is  a  neophyte. 

This  is  Canon  XIII.   of  Dionysius,  Isidore, 
and  the  Prisca. 

Van  Espen. 

By  Scholasticus  deforo  ["professional  advo- 
cate "]  must  be  understood  an  eloquent  pleader 


of  difficult  causes,  who  being  bound  up  in 
forensic  disputes  and  strifes,  may  be  presumed 
to  be  little  fitted  for  the  priesthood,  and  there- 
fore to  need  a  more  strict  examination. 

The  Synodal  approbation  is  lacking  in 
Dioii3rsius  as  given  by  Justellus,  as  well  as  in 
that  of  the  Roman  Code,  but  is  found  in 
Labbe's  reprint  of  Dionysius  and  Isidore. 

This  Canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Ganonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  P.  I.,  Dist.  lxj., 
c.  x. 


CANON  XI. 

{Greek) 

Bishop  Hosius  said :  This  also  we  ought  to  decree,  that '  when  a  bishop  comes 
from  one  city  to  another  city,  or  from  one  province  to  another  province,  to  indulge 
boastfulness,  ministering  to  his  own  praises  rather  than  serving  religious  devotion,  and 
wishes  to  prolong  his  stay  [in  a  city],  and  the  bishop  of  that  city  is  not  skilled  in  teach- 
ing, let  him  [the  visiting  bishop]  not  do  despite  to  the  bishop  of  the  place  and  attempt 
by  frequent  discourses  to  disparage  him  and  lessen  his  repute  (for  this  device  is  wont  to 
cause  tumults),  and  strive  by  such  arts  to  solicit  and  wrest  to  himself  another's  throne, 


1  Here  begins  the  Greek  test,  according  to  Bev. 


426  SAEDICA.     A.D.  343  or  344 

not  scrupling  to  abandon  the  church  committed  to  him  and  to  procure  translation  to 
another.  A  definite  limit  of  time  should  therefore  be  set  in  such  a  case,  especially  since 
not  to  receive  a  bishop  is  accounted  the  part  of  rude  and  discourteous  persons.  Ye 
remember  that  in  former  times  our  fathers  decreed  that  if  a  layman  were  staying  in  a 
city  and  should  not  come  to  divine  worship  for  three  [successive]  Sundays  [that  is],  for 
three  [full]  weeks,  he  should  be  repelled  from  communion.  If  then  this  has  been  de- 
creed in  the  case  of  laymen,  it  is  neither  needful,  nor  fitting,  nor  yet  even  expedient 
that  a  bishop,  unless  he  has  some  grave  necessity  or  difficult  business,  should  be  very 
long  absent  from  his  own  church  and  distress  the  people  committed  to  him. 
All  the  bishops  said  :  We  decide  that  this  decree  also  is  most  proper. 

(Latin.) 

Bishop  Hosius  said :  This  also  ye  ought  to  determine.  If  a  bishop  comes  from 
one  city  to  another  city,  or  from  his  own  province  to  another  province,  and  serving  am- 
bition rather  than  devotion,  wishes  to  remain  resident  for  a  long  time  in  a  strange  city, 
and  then  (as  it  perchance  happens  that  the  bishop  of  the  place  is  not  so  practised  or  so 
learned  as  himself)  he,  the  stranger,  should  begin  to  do  him  despite  and  deliver  fre- 
quent discourses  to  disparage  him  and  lessen  his  repute,  not  hesitating  by  this  device  to 
leave  the  church  assigned  him  and  remove  to  that  Avhich  is  another's — do  ye  then  [in 
such  a  case]  set  a  limit  of  time  [for  his  stay  in  the  city],  because  on  the  one  hand  to  re- 
fuse to  receive  a  bishop  is  discourteous,  and  on  the  other  his  too  long  stay  is  mis- 
chievous. Provision  must  be  made  against  this.  I  remember  that  in  a  former  coun- 
cil our  brethren  decreed  that  if  any  layman  did  not  attend  divine  service  in  a  city 
in  which  he  was  staying  three  Sundays,  that  is,  for  three  vreeks,  he  should  be  deprived 
of  communion.  If  then  this  has  been  decreed  in  the  case  of  laymen,  it  is  far  less  law- 
ful and  fitting  that  a  bishop,  if  there  be  no  grave  necessity  detaining  him,  should  be  ab- 
sent from  his  church  longer  than  the  time  above  written. 

All  said  that  such  was  their  pleasure. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XI. 
A  bishop  when  called  in  by  another  bishop,  if 
he  that  called  him  is  unskilled,  must  not  be  too 
assiduous  in  preaching,  for  this  would  be  indec- 
orous to  the  unlearned   bishop,  and  an  attach 


NOTES. 

Van  Espen. 
To  understand  this  canon  it  must  be  again 
remembered  that  in  the  first  ages  of  the  Church 
bishops  were  wont  to  be  appointed  at  the  de- 
mand of  the  people  ;  wherefore  whoever  were 


upon  his  bishopric.     And  both  improper.   With-  j  going  around  after  the  episcopate,  were  ac 


out  grave  necessity  it  is  undesirable  for  cc  bishop 
to  be  absent  from  his  church, 


This  is  Canon  XIV.  of  the  Latin, 


customed  to  solicit  the  hearts  of  the  people, 
and  to  make  it  their  study  to  win  their  affec- 
tions. 


CANON  XII. 


(Greek) 

Bishop  Hosius  said :  Since  no  case  should  be  left  unprovided  for,  let  this  also  be 
decreed.1  Some  of  our  brethren  and  fellow-bishops  are  known  to  possess  very  little 
private  property  in  the  cities  in  which  they  are  placed  as  bishops,  but  have  great 
possessions  in  other  places,  with  which  they  are,  moreover,  able  to  help  the  poor.  I 
think  then  permission  should  be  given  them,  if  they  are  to  visit  their  estates  and 
attend  to  the  gathering  of  the  harvest,  to  pass  three  Sundays,  that  is,  to  stay  for  three 
Aveeks,  on  their  estates,  and  to  assist  at  divine  worship  and  celebrate  the  liturgy  in  the 
nearest  church  in  which  a  presbyter  holds  service,  in  order  that  they  may  not  be  seen 
to  be  absent  from  worship,  and  in  order  that  they  may  not  come  too  frequently  to  the 

1  Here  begins  the  Greek  text  according  to  Bev. 


SARDICA.     A.D.  343  or  344  427 

city  in  which  there  is  a  bishop.  In  this  Avay  their  private  affairs  will  suffer  no  loss 
from  their  absence  and  they  will  be  seen  to  be  clear  from  the  charge  of  ambition  and 
arrogance. 

All  the  bishops  said  :  This  decree  also  is  approved  by  us. 

(Latin.) 

Bishop  Hosius  said :  Since  no  case  should  be  left  unprovided  for  [let  this  also  be 
decreed].  There  are  some  of  our  brother-bishops,  who  do  not  reside  in  the  city  in 
which  they  are  appointed  bishops,  either  because  they  have  but  little  property  there, 
while  they  are  known  to  have  considerable  estates  elsewhere,  or,  it  may  be,  through 
affection  for  kith  and  kin  and  in  complaisance  to  these.  Let  this  much  be  permitted 
them,  to  go  to  their  estates  to  superintend  and  dispose  of  their  harvest,  and  [for  this 
purpose]  to  remain  over  three  Sundays,  that  is,  for  three  weeks,  if  it  be  necessary,  on 
their  estates  ;  or  else,  if  there  is  a  neighbouring  city  in  which  there  is  a  presbyter,  in 
order  that  they  may  not  be  seen  to  pass  Sunday  without  church,  let  them  go  thither,  so 
that  [in  this  way]  neither  will  their  private  affairs  suffer  loss  from  their  absence,  nor 
will  they,  by  frequent  going  to  the  city  in  which  a  bishop  is  resident,  incur  the  sus- 
picion of  ambition  and  place-seeking.     All  said  that  this  was  approved  by  them. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XII.  i  for  while  the  last  canon  decrees  that  no  bishop 

If  a  bishop  has  possessions  outside  his  diocese,   is  to  be  absent  from  his  diocese  for  more  than 

and  visits  them,  Jet  him  be  careful  not  to  remain  three  Lord's  days,  without  grave  necessity,  in 

there  more  than  three  Lord's  days.     For  thus  his  \  this  canon  a  certain  modification  is  introduced 


oion  flock  ivill  be  enriched  by  him,  and  lie  himself 
will  avoid  the  charge  of  arrogance. 

This  is  Canon  XV.  of  the  Latin. 

Van  Espen. 
As  Balsamon  notes,  this  canon  is  an  appen- 


with  regard  to  certain  bishops. 

Hefele. 

According  to  the  Latin  text  of  Dionysius, 

it  is  :     "  Some  bishops  do  not  reside  in  their 

Cathedral  town,  etc."     Isidore  and  the  Prisca, 

however,  are  nearer    the  Greek   text,   as  in- 


dix  to  that  which  goes  before,  and  the  context !  stead  of  resident  they  more  rightly  read  possi- 
of  the  canon  indicates  this  clearly  enough  ; '  dent. 


CANON  XIII. 

(Greek.) 

Bishop  Hosius  said :  Be  this  also  the  pleasure  of  all.  '  If  any  deacon  or  presbyter 
or  any  of  the  clergy  be  excommunicated  and  take  refuge  with  another  bishop  who 
knows  him  and  who  is  aware  that  he  has  been  removed  from  communion  by  his  own 
bishop,  [that  other  bishop]  must  not  offend  against  his  brother  bishop  by  admitting 
him  to  communion.1  And  if  any  dare  to  do  this,  let  him  knoAV  that  he  must  present 
himself  before  an  assembly  of  bishops  and  give  account. 

All  the  bishops  said :  This  decision  will  assure  peace  at  all  times  and  preserve  the 
concord  of  all. 

(Latin.) 

Bishop  Hosius  said  :  Be  this  also  the  pleasure  of  all.  If  a  deacon  or  presbyter  or 
any  of  the  clergy  be  refused  communion  by  his  own  bishop  and  go  to  another  bishop, 
and  he  with  whom  he  has  taken  refuge  shall  know  that  he  has  been  repelled  by  his  own 
bishop,  then  must  he  not  grant  him  communion.  But  if  he  shall  do  so,  let  him  know 
that  he  must  give  account  before  an  assembly  of  bishops. 

All  said :  This  decision  will  preserve  peace  and  maintain  concord. 

3  Here  begins  the  Greek  test  according  to  Bev.,  and  ends  at  the  asterisk. 


428  SAKDICA.     A.D.  343  ok  344 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XIII. 


Wlioso  knowingly  admits  to  communion  one 
excommunicated  by  his  own  bishop  is  not  toitli- 
out  blame. 

This  is  Canon  XVI.  of  the  Latin. 


Van  Espen. 
The  present  canon  agrees  with  Canon  V. 
of  Nice  and  with  Canon  IV.  of  Antioch,  on 
which  canons  see  the  notes.  The  Synod's 
approbation  of  this  canon  is  found  in  Diony- 
shis,  Isidore,  and  in  the  Roman  Codex  apud 
Hervetus  ;  but  it  is  lacking  from  Balsamon 
and  Zonaras. 


CANON  XIV. 

(Greek.) 

Bishop  Hosius  said :  I  must  not  fail  to  speak  of  a  matter  which  constantly  urgeth 
me.1  If  a  bishop  be  found  quick  to  anger  (which  ought  not  to  sway  such  a  man),  and 
he,  suddenly  moved  against  a  presbyter  or  deacon,  be  minded  to  cast  him  out  of  the 
Church,  provision  must  be  made  that  such  a  one  be  not  condemned  too  hastily  [or  read 
aSwov,  if  innocent]  and  deprived  of  communion. 

All  said :  Let  him  that  is  cast  out  be  authorized  to  take  refuge  with  the  bishop  of 
the  metropolis  of  the  same  province.  And  if  the  bishop  of  the  metropolis  is  absent, 
let  him  hasten  to  the  bishop  that  is  nearest,  and  ask  to  have  his  case  carefully  exam- 
ined.    For  a  hearing  ought  not  to  be  denied  those  avIio  ask  it. 

And  that  bishop  who  cast  out  such  a  one,  justly  or  unjustly,  ought  not  to  take  it  ill 
that  examination  of  the  case  be  made,  and  his  decision  confirmed  or  revised.  But, 
until  all  the  particulars  have  been  examined  with  care  and  fidelity,  he  who  is  excluded 
from  communion  ought  not  to  demand  communion  in  advance  of  the  decision  of  his 
case.  And  if  any  of  the  clergy  who  have  met  [to  hear  the  case]  clearly  discern  arro- 
gance and  pretentiousness  in  him,  inasmuch  as  it  is  not  fitting  to  suffer  insolence  or 
unjust  censure,  they  ought  to  correct  such  an  one  with  somewhat  harsh  and  grievous 
language,  that  men  may  submit  to  and  obey  commands  that  are  proper  and  right.  For 
as  the  bishop  eight  to  manifest  sincere  love  and  regard  to  his  subordinates,  so  those 
who  are  subject  to  him  ought  in  like  manner  to  perform  the  duties  of  their  ministry  in 
sincerity  towards  their  bishops. 

(Latin.) 

Bishop  Hosius  said  :  I  must  not  fail  to  speak  of  a  matter  which  further  moveth  me. 
If  some  bishop  is  perchance  quick  to  anger  (which  ought  not  to  be  the  case)  and, 
moved  hastily  and  violently  against  one  of  his  presbyters  or  deacons,  be  minded  to 
east  him  out  of  the  Church,  provision  must  be  made  that  an  innocent  man  be  not  con- 
demned or  deprived  of  communion. 

Therefore  let  him  that  is  cast  out  be  authorized  to  appeal  to  the  neighbouring 
bishops  and  let  his  case  be  heard  and  examined  into  more  diligently.  For  a  hearing 
ought  not  to  be  denied  one  who  asks  it. 

And  let  that  bishop  who  cast  him  out,  justly  or  unjustly,  take  it  patiently  that  the 
matter  is  discussed,  so  that  his  sentence  may  either  be  approved  by  a  number  [of 
judges]  or  else  revised.  Nevertheless,  until  all  the  particulars  shall  be  examined  with 
care  and  fidelity,  no  one  else  ought  to  presume  to  admit  to  communion  him  who  was 
excluded  therefrom  in  advance  of  the  decision  of  his  case.  If,  however,  those  who 
meet  to  hear  it  observe  arrogance  and  pride  in  [such]  clergy,  inasmuch  as  it  surely  is 
not  fitting  for  a  bishop  to  suffer  wrong  or  insult,  let  them  correct  them  with  some 
severity  of  language,  that  they  may  obey  a  bishop  Avhose  commands  are  proper  and 
right.  For  as  he  [the  bishop]  ought  to  manifest  sincere  love  and  charity  to  his 
clergy,  so  his  ministers  ought  for  their  part  to  render  unfeigned  obedience  to  their 
bishop. 

1  The  Greek  text  of  Bev.  begins  here. 


SARDICA.     A.D.  343  or  344 


429 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XIV. 
One  condemned  out  of  anger,  if  lie  asks  for  as- 
sistance, should  he  heard.     But  until  [he  shall 
have  asked  for1]  the  assistance  let  Mm  remain 
excommunicated. 

This  is  Canon  XVII.  of  the  Latin  version. 

Van  Espen. 
This  canon  is  intended  especially  to  aid 
presbyters,  deacons,  and  other  clerics,  who 
have  been  excommunicated  precipitately  and 
without  just  cause,  or  suspended  by  their  own 
bishop  in  his  anger  and  fury.  .  .  .  The 
canon,  moreover,  admonishes  that  the  bishop 
with  regard  to  whose  sentence  the  dispute 
has  arisen  shall  patiently  consent  to  the  dis- 


cussion of  the  matter  de  novo,  whether  his 
decision  be  sustained  by  the  majority  or 
emended. 

And  let  bishops  and  other  prelates  who 
have  spiritual  jurisdiction  over  the  clergy 
note  this,  who  cannot  bear  with  equanimity 
that  a  word  should  be  said  against  their  de- 
I  cisions,  but  exact  a  kind  of  blind  obedience, 
even  frequently  with  great  conscientious 
suffering  to  their  very  best  ecclesiastics  ;  and 
in  such  cases  as  do  not  promptly  and  blindly 
obey  them,  the  clergy  are  traduced  as  rebels 
and  even  a  patient  hearing  is  refused  to  them. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  P.  II.,  Causa  XL, 
Q.  iij.,  c.  iv. 


[After  Canon  XIV.] 


CANON  XVIII.    (Of  the  Latin.) 

Bishop  Januarius  said :  Let  your  holiness  also  decree  this,  that  no  bishop  be  al- 
lowed to  try  to  gain  for  himself  a  minister  in  the  church  of  a  bishop  of  another  city  and 
ordain  him  to  one  of  his  own  parishes. 

All  said  :  Such  is  our  pleasure,  inasmuch  as  discord  is  apt  to  spring  from  contentions 
in  this  matter,  and  therefore  the  sentence  of  us  all  forbids  anyone  to  presume  to  do 


NOTE. 


Van  Espen. 

It  is  manifest  that  these  two  canons  [xviii. 

of  the  Latin  and  xv.  of  the  Greek],  contain 

the  resolution  of  the  same  case,  and  therefore 

it  is  that  the  Greeks  keep  only  the  former 


which  contains  the  decree  of  the  synod,  made 
on  Hosius's  motion,  the  suggestion  having 
been  made  by  Januarius  the  bishop  :  which 
suggestion  makes  the  first  of  these  canons. 
[I.e.  Latin  canon  xviij.] 


CANON  XV. 

(Greek) 

Bishop  Hosiers  said :  And  let  us  all  decree  this  also,  that 2  if  any  bishop  should 
ordain  to  any  order  the  minister  of  another  from  another  diocese  without  the  consent 
of  his  own  bishop,  such  an  ordination  should  be  accounted  invalid  and  not  confirmed. 
And  if  any  take  upon  themselves  to  do  this  they  ought  to  be  admonished  and  corrected 
by  our  brethren  and  fellow-bishops. 

All  said :  Let  this  decree  also  stand  unalterable. 

(Latin.) 

Bishop  Hosius  said :  This  also  we  all  decree,  that  if  any  [bishop]  should  ordain  the 
minister  of  another  from  another  diocese  without  the  consent  and  will  of  his  own 
bishop,  his  ordination  be  not  ratified.  And  whoever  shall  have  taken  upon  himself  to 
do  this  ought  to  be  admonished  and  corrected  by  our  brethren  and  fellow-bishops. 


1  This  is  the  understanding  of  Beveridge's  Latin.  I  should  have  | 
supposed  the  words  to  be  supplied  were  "the  reception  of." 


2  The  Greek  text  of  Bev.  begins  here, 


430 


SARDIOA.     A.D.  343  or  344 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XV. 
If  one  places  a  foreign  minister  without  the 
knowledge  of  his  own  bishop  in  any  grade  (e/mfSaS- 
pov,  in  aliquo  gradu),  lie  ]ias  indeed  made  the 
appointment,  but  it  is  without  force. 

This  is  Canon  XIX.  in  the  Latin. 

Hefele. 
Fuchs,  in  his  Bibliotheh  der  Kirchencersamm- 
lungcn  (Pt.  II.,  p.  123,  note  125),  thinks  he 
has  discovered  a  difference  between  this  can- 
on and  the  exclusively  Latin  one  preceding  it, 
in  that  the  latter  supposes  the  case  of  a 
bishop  ordaining  a  foreign  cleric,  over  whom 
he  has  no  jurisdiction,  to  a  higher  grade, 
with  the  view  of  retaining  him  for  his  own 
diocese  ;  while  the  other — fifteenth  or  nine- 
teenth canon — treats  of  a  case  where  such  an 
ordination  takes  place  without  the  ordaining 
bishop  intending  to  keep  the  person  ordained 
for  his  own  diocese.  Van  Espen  is  of  another 
opinion,  and  maintains  that  both  canons  ob- 
viously refer  to  one  and  the  same  case,  for 
which  reason  the  Greek  text  has  only  inserted 


one  of  them.  It  is  certain  that  the  text  of 
both  canons,  as  we  have  it,  does  not  clearly 
indicate  the  difference  conjectured  by  Fuchs, 
but  that  it  may  easily  be  found  there. 

Van  Espen. 

If  the  reading  of  all  the  Latins  and  Greeks 
is  decisive,  this  canon  only  treats  of  the  ordi- 
nation of  those  already  ministers  or  clerics, 
and  so  the  Greek  commentators  Balsamon, 
Zonaras,  and  Aristenus  understood  it,  as  is 
evident  from  their  annotations.  But  Gratus, 
Bishop  of  Carthage,  and  Primate  of  Africa,  in 
the  First  Synod  of  Carthage  testified  that  in 
this  canon  it  was  decreed,  that  without  the 
licence  of  his  own  bishop,  a  layman  of  another 
diocese  was  not  to  be  ordained,  and  this  inter- 
pretation or  rather  extension  of  the  Canon, 
was  received  everywhere,  as  is  demonstrated 
by  the  fift3'-sixth  of  the  African  Code. 

This   together   with    Canon    XIX.  of   the 

Latin  text  are  found  as  one  in  the  Corpus 

Juris  Canonici  (Gratian's  Dceretum,  P.  I., 
Dist.  lxxj.),  c.  j. 


CANON  XVI. 

(Greet) 

Bishop  Aetius  said  :  Ye  are  not  ignorant  how  important  and  how  large  is  the  metro- 
politan city  of  Thessalonica.  Accordingly  presbyters  and  deacons  often  come  to  it  from 
other  provinces  and,  not  content  with  staying  a  short  time,  remain  and  make  it  their 
permanent  place  of  residence,  or  are  compelled  with  difficulty  and  after  a  very  long  de- 
lay to  return  to  their  own  churches.     A  decree  should  be  made  bearing  on  this  matter. 

Bishop  Hosius  said  :  Let  those  decrees  which  have  been  made  in  the  case  of 
bishops,  be  observed  as  to  these  persons  also. 

(Latin.') 

Bishop  Aetius  said  :  Ye  are  not  ignorant  how  large  and  important  is  the  city  of  Thes- 
salonica. Presbyters  and  deacons  often  come  to  it  from  other  regions,  and  are  not  con- 
tent to  remain  a  short  time,  but  either  make  their  residence  there  or  at  least  are  with 
difficulty  compelled  to  return  after  a  long  interval  to  their  own  place. 

All  said :  Those  limits  of  time  which  have  been  decreed  in  the  case  of  bishops 
ought  to  be  observed  as  to  these  persons  also. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XVI. 
WJiat  things  have  been  decreed  for  bishops  tvith 
regard  to  the  length  of  their  absence,  applies  also 
to  presbyters  and  deacons. 


Van  Espen. 


This  canon  needs  no  explanation. 


The  loference  is  given  incorrectly  in  the  English  Hefele. 


SAEDIOA.     A.D.  343  or  344  431 

CANON  XVII. 

(Greek) 

At  the  suggestion  moreover  of  our  brother  Olympius,  l  we  are  pleased  to  decree  this 
also :  That  if  a  bishop  suffer  violence  and  is  unjustly  cast  out  either  on  account  of  his 
discipline  or  for  his  confession  of  [the  faith  of]  the  Catholic  Church  or  for  his  defence 
of  the  truth,  and,  fleeing  from  danger,  although  innocent  and  devout  [or,  innocent  and 
being  under  charge  of  high  treason],  comes  to  another  city,  let  him  not  be  forbidden  to 
stay  there  until  he  is  restored  or  until  deliverance  can  be  found  from  the  violence  and 
injustice  that  have  been  done  him.  For  it  would  be  harsh  indeed  and  most  oppressive 
that  one  who  has  suffered  unjust  expulsion  should  not  be  harboured  by  us ;  as  such  a 
man  ought  to  be  received  with  the  greatest  consideration  and  cordiality.* 

All  said  :     This  also  is  our  pleasure. 

(Latin.) 

At  the  suggestion  of  our  brother  Olympius,  we  are  pleased  to  decree  this  also  :  That 
if  any  suffer  violence  and  is  unjustly  cast  out  on  account  of  his  discipline  and  his 
Catholic  confession  or  for  his  defence  of  the  truth,  and,  fleeing  from  dangers,  although 
innocent  and  devout,  comes  to  another  city,  let  him  not  be  forbidden  to  stay  there  until 
he  can  return  or  his  wrong  has  been  redressed.  For  it  is  harsh  and  unfeeling  that  he 
who  is  suffering  persecution  should  not  be  received  ;  indeed,  great  cordiality  and  abun- 
dant consideration  should  be  shown  him. 

All  the  synod  said :  All  that  has  been  decreed  the  Catholic  Church  spread  abroad 
throughout  all  the  world  will  preserve  and  maintain. 

And  all  the  bishops  of  the  various  provinces  who  had  assembled  subscribed  thus  : 

I,  N.,  bishop  of  the  city  of  N.  and  the  province  of  N.,  so  believe  as  above  is  written. 


NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XVII. 


If  a  bishop  goes  into  another  province  after 
he  has  been  unjustly  expelled  from  his  oion,  he 
should  be  received,  until  he  has  been  delivered 
from  his  injury. 


This  is  Canon  XXI.  of  the  Latin  and  the 
last. 

Van  Espen. 

St.  Gregory  seems  to  have  had  this  canon 
in  mind  when  he  wrote  to  the  bishops  of 
Illyria  (Lib.  III.,  Epist.  xliij.),  who  had  been 
cast  out  by  the  hostility  of  the  barbarians. 


CANON  XVIII. 

(Greek) 

Bishop  Gaudentius  said  :  Thou  knowest,  brother  Aetius,  that  since  thou  wast 
made  bishop,  peace  hath  continued  to  rule  [in  thy  diocese].  In  order  that  no  remnants 
of  discord  concerning  ecclesiastics  remain,  it  seems  good  that  those  who  were  ordained 
by  Musaeus  and  by  Eutychianus,  provided  no  fault  be  found  in  them,  should  all  be 
received. 

(This  canon  is  wanting  in  the  Latin.) 

CANON  XIX. 
(Greek) 

Bishop  Hosius  said:  This  is  the  sentence  of  my  mediocrity  [i.e.,  unworthiness] — 
that,  since  we  ought  to  be  gentle  and  patient  and  to  be  constant  in  compassion  towards 
all,  those  who  were  once  advanced  to  clerical   office  in  the  Church  by  certain  of  our 

1  The  Greek  text  of  Bev.  begins  here  and  ends  at  the  asterisk. 


432  SARDICA.     A.D.  343  or  344 

brethren,  if  they  are  not  willing  to  return  to  the  churches  to  which  they  were  nominated 
[or,  espoused],  should  for  the  future  not  be  received,  and  that  neither  Eutychianus 
should  continue  to  vindicate  to  himself  the  name  of  bishop,  nor  yet  that  Musseus  be 
accounted  a  bishop ;  but  that  if  they  should  seek  for  lay  communion,  it  should  not  be 
denied  them. 

All  said :     Such  is  our  pleasure. 

(This  canon  is  wanting  in  the  Latin.) 

NOTES. 
Ancient  Epitome  of  Canons  XVIII.  and  XIX, 


A  clergyman  ivho  does  not  live  in  the  Church 
among  whose  clergy  he  is  enrolled  should  not  he 
received.  EutycMan  and  Musceus  shall  not  have 
the  name  of  bishops.  But  let  them  be  admitted 
to  communion  with  the  laity,  if  they  wish. 


Both  of  these  canons  are  lacking  in  the 
Latin. 

Hefele. 

It  is  clear  that  the  reason  why  these  two 
canons  do  not  exist  in  the  Latin  text  is  that 
they  did  not  apply  to  the  Latin  Church  and 
only  contained  a  special  rule  for  Thessalonica. 


CANON  XX. 

(Greek) 

Bishop  Gaudentius  said :  These  things  wholesomely,  duly,  and  fitly  decreed,  in  the 
estimation  of  us  the  bishops  [toov  lepimv]  such  as  are  pleasing  both  to  God  and  to  man 
will  not  be  able  to  obtain  due  force  and  validity,  unless  fear  [of  a  penalty]  be  added  to 
the  decrees  proclaimed.  For  we  ourselves  know  that  through  the  shamelessness  of  a 
few,  the  divine  and  right  reverend  title  of  bishop  [of  the  t?/9  iepcoa-vvn<i]  hath  often  come 
into  condemnation.  If  therefore  any  one,  moved  by  arrogance  and  ambition  rather  than 
seeking  to  please  God,  should  have  the  hardihood  to  pursue  a  different  course  of  action, 
contrary  to  the  decree  of  all,  let  him  know  beforehand  that  he  must  give  account  and 
defend  himself  on  this  charge,  and  lose  the  honour  and  dignity  of  the  episcopate. 

All  answered :  This  sentence  is  proper  and  right,  and  such  is  our  pleasure.1 

And  this  decree  will  be  most  Avidely  known  and  best  carried  into  effect,  if  each  of 
those  bishops  among  us  who  have  sees  on  the  thoroughfares  or  highway,  on  seeing  a 
bishop  [pass  by]  shall  inquire  into  the  cause  of  his  passage  and  his  place  of  destina- 
tion. And  if  at  his  departure  he  shall  find  that  he  is  going  to  the  Court,  he  will  direct 
his  inquiries  with  reference  to  the  objects  [of  a  resort  to  the  Court]  above  mentioned. 
And  if  he  come  by  invitation  let  no  obstacle  be  put  in  the  way  of  his  departure.  But  if 
he  is  trying  to  go  to  the  Court  out  of  ostentation,  as  hath  afore  been  said  by  your 
charity,  or  to  urge  the  petitions  of  certain  persons,  let  neither  his  letters  be  signed  nor 
let  such  an  one  be  received  to  communion. 

All  said :  Be  this  also  decreed 

(Latin.) 

Bishop  Gaudentius  said :  These  things  which  you  have  wholesomely  and  suitably 
provided  [in  your  decrees]  pleasing  in  [or,  to]  the  estimation  of  all  both  [or,  and]  to 
God  and  to  men,  can  obtain  force  and  validity  only  in  case  fear  [of  a  penalty]  be  added 
to  this  your  action.  For  we  ourselves  know  that  through  the  shamelessness  of  a  few  the 
sacred  and  venerable  sacerdotal  [ — episcopal]  name  hath  been  many  times  and  oft  brought 
to  blame.  If  therefore  anyone  attempts  to  ov)pose  the  judgment  of  all  and  seeks  to  serve 
ambition  rather  than  please  God,  he  must  be  given  to  know  that  he  will  have  to  render 
an  account  and  lose  office  and  rank. 

This  can  be  carried  into  effect  only  provided  each  of  us  whose  see  is  on  the  highway 
shall,  if  he  sees  a  bishop  pass,  inquire  into  the  cause  of  his  journey,  ascertain  his  desti- 

'  Here  begins  Canon  \xj.,  according  to  tne  Greek  text  of  Bev. 


SARDICA.     A.D.  343  or  344 


433 


nation,  and  if  lie  finds  that  lie  is  on  bis  way  to  the  Court,  satisfy  himself  as  to  what  is  con- 
tained above  [i.e.,  as  to  his  objects  at  Court],  lest  perhaps  he  has  come  by  invitation,  that 
permission  may  be  given  him  to  proceed.  If,  however,  as  your  holiness  mentioned 
above,  he  is  going  to  Court  to  urge  petitions  and  applications  for  office,  let  neither  his 
letters  be  signed  nor  let  him  be  received  to  communion. 

All  said  that  this  was  proper  and  right  and  that  this  regulation  was  approved  by 
them. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XX.  [the  last  part 
of  which  in  Beveridge,  Synod.,  is  numbered 
xxj.] 

If  any  bishop  tries  out  of  pride  to  doaivay  with 
what  has  been  decreed  admirably,  and  in  a  man- 
ner pleasing  to  God,  he  shall  lose  his  episcopate. 
A  bishop  who  shall  see  a  bishop  on  his  way  to 
the  camp,  if  he  shall  lenow  that  he  goes  therefor 
any  of  the  before-mentioned  causes,  let  him  not 
trouble  him,  but  if  otherwise  let  him  pronounce 
excommunication  against  him. 

This  is  Canon  XI.  of  the  Latin. 

Van  Espen. 
After  the  words   ["honour  and  dignity"] 
according  to  Balsamon  and  Zonaras,  as  also 
Gentian  Hervetus,  there  follows  the  approba- 
tion of  the  synod  in  these  words  :  "  All  an- 


swered, This  opinion  is  becoming  and  well- 
pleasing  to  us,"  which  indicate  this  to  be  the 
end  of  the  canon  ;  and  therefore  the  Greeks 
make  of  this  two  distinct  canons. 

Dionysius  and  Isidore  make  but  one  canon, 
.  .  .  and  this  appears  to  be  more  congru- 
ous on  account  of  the  subject-matter  of  the 
first  part,  and  will  be  manifest  by  connecting 
the  two  parts  together. 

Van  Espen  follows  Zonaras  and  Balsamon 
in  understanding  "Bishops  in  Canali,"  as 
such  as  were  set  on  the  public  roads  and 
public  highways,  or  rather  "in  cities  which 
are  on  the  public  highways,  or  '  Canals,'  by 
which  they  that  pass  go  without  labour,  as  in 
a  canal  or  aqueduct  the  water  flows,  for  aque- 
duct and  canal  are  the  same  thing  in  the  Ro- 
man tongue." 


[After  Canon  XX.] 


CANON  XII.     {Of  the  Latin  Texts.) 

Bishop  Hosius  said :  But  some  discretion  is  here  requisite,  brethren  dearly  beloved, 
in  case  some  should  come  to  those  cities  which  are  on  the  highway  still  ignorant  of 
what  has  been  decreed  in  the  council.  The  bishop  of  such  a  city  ought  therefore  to 
admonish  him  [a  bishop  so  arriving],  and  instruct  him  to  send  his  deacon  from  that 
place.     Upon  this  admonition  he  must,  however,  himself  return  to  his  diocese. 


NOTES. 


Van  Espen. 


This  proposition  of  Hosius  in  the  Roman 
Codex  is  joined  as  an  appendix  to  the  preced- 
ing canon.  The  Greeks  omit  it  altogether, 
very  likely  either  because  it  seemed  to  be  a 
proposition  of  Hosius's  rather  than  a  synodal  I  the  threatened  penalties. 


canon,  for  no  adoption  by  the  synod  is  re- 
corded :  or  else  because,  even  if  it  were  a  de- 
cree, it  was  only  of  temporary  character,  that 
is  to  say,  until  the  canons  had  been  sufficient- 
ly promulgated,  and  therefore  some  on  the 
ground  of  ignorance  might  be  exempt  from 


EXCURSUS  ON  THE  OTHER  ACTS  OF  THE  COUNCIL. 

As  only  the  Canons  have  any  real  connexion  with  the  Ecumenical  Synods,  they  alone 
have  properly  a  place  in  this  volume,  and  yet  it  may  not  be  amiss  to  give  a  brief  account  of 
the  other  acts  of  the  council,  so  far  as  we  know  them. 

(a)  The  Rule  for  Keeping  Easter. — The  Anglican  Scholar,  the  Rev.  William  Cureton,  of 
the  British  Museum,  first  edited  the  then  recently  discovered  Preface  to  the  Paschal  Letters 

VOL.    XIV.  f  f 


434 


SARDICA.     A.D.  343  or  344 


of  St.  Atlianasius,  together  with  the  Letters  themselves.  The  MS.  -which  he  then  published 
was  in  Syriac  and  was  discovered  in  Egypt.  In  the  preface  just  referred  to,  it  is  expressly 
stated  that  "a  plan  was  agreed  upon  at  Sardica  with  regard  to  the  feast  of  Easter."  But  this 
new  plan,  which  was  only  expected  to  hold  good  for  fifty  years,  failed,  and  although  in 
a.d.  346  Easter  should  have  fallen  on  March  23d,  yet  the  Council  (so  says  St.  Athanasius) 
agreed  to  observe  it  on  March  30tl).  Another  divergence  fell  in  a.d.  349.  Easter,  by  the 
Alexandrian  calculation,  would  have  been  April  23d.  But  by  Roman  count,  the  origin  of 
which  was  attributed  to  St.  Peter,  Easter  was  never  to  be  later  than  April  21st,  and  for  the 
sake  of  peace  the  Alexandrians  yielded  to  the  Romans  and  kept  Easter  on  March  26th  ;  but 
in  350,  360,  and  368  the  Alexandrian  and  Roman  methods  again  disagreed,  and  even  the  fifty 
years  which  Sardica  had  thought  to  ensure  uniformity  were  marked  by  diverse  usages. 

(b)  The  Encyclical  Letter. — The  Council  addressed  a  long  Encyclical  letter  to  all  the 
bishops  of  the  world  ;  it  is  found  in  St.  Athanasius1  in  Greek,  in  St.  Hilary  of  Poictiers2  in 
Latin,  and  in  Theodoret's  Ecclesiastical  History*  In  this  last  there  occurs  at  the  end  the  so- 
called  "  Creed  of  Sardica,"  which  is  now  considered  by  scholars  to  be  undoubtedly  spurious. 

(c)  A  Letter  to  the  Diocese  of  Alexandria. — St.  Athanasius1  gives  us  the  Greek  text  of  a  let- 
ter sent  by  the  council  to  the  diocese  of  Alexandria  to  the  bishops  of  Egypt  and  Libya. 

(d)  A  Letter  to  Pope  Julius. — Among  the  Fragments  of  St.  Hilary5  is  found  a  letter  from 
the  synod  to  Pope  Julius.  Hefele  says  that  the  text  is  "considerably  injured."  One  clause 
of  this  letter  above  all  others  has  given  occasion  to  much  controversy.  The  passage  runs  as 
follows  :  "It  was  best  and  fittest  that  the  priests  [i.e.,  bishojDs]  from  all  the  provinces  should 
make  their  reports  to  the  head,  that  is,  the  chair  of  St.  Peter."  Blondell  declares  the  pas- 
sage to  be  an  interpolation,  resting  his  opinion  upon  the  barbarous  Latin  of  the  expression 
valde  congruentissimum.  And  even  Remi  Ceillier,  while  explaining  this  by  the  supposition, 
which  is  wholly  gratuitous,  that  the  original  was  Greek,  yet  is  forced  to  confess  that  the  sen- 
tence interrupts  the  flow  of  thought  and  looks  like  an  insertion.  Bower,0  in  his  History  of 
the  Popes,  and  Fuchs7  have  urged  still  more  strongly  the  spurious  character  of  the  phrase, 
the  latter  using  the  convenient  "marginal  comment"  explanation. 

Besides  these  there  are  three  documents  which  Scipio  Maffei  discovered  in  MS.  at 
Verona,  which  by  some  are  supposed  to  belong  to  the  Council  of  Sardica. 

(a)  A  Letter  to  the  Christians  of  Mareotis. 

(6)  A  Letter  of  St.  Athanasius  to  the  same  Mareotic  Churches.  This  letter  is  signed 
not  only  by  Athanasius,  but  also  by  a  great  number  of  the  bishops  composing  the  synod. 

(c)  A  Letter  from  St.  xlthanasius  to  the  Church  of  Alexandria. 

On  the  authority  to  be  attributed  to  these  three  documents  I  can  do  no  better  than 
quote  the  closing  words  of  Hefele,8  whom  I  have  followed  in  this  whole  excursus. 

"  These  extracts  shew,  I  think,  quite  sufficiently  the  spuriousness  of  these  documents. 
Is  it  possible  that  the  Eusebians  would  have  said  of  themselves  :  'We  are  enemies  of  Christ?  ' 
But  apart  from  this,  the  whole  contents  of  these  three  letters  are  lame  and  feeble.  The  con- 
stant repetition  of  the  same  words  is  intolerable,  and  the  whole  style  pointless  and  trivial. 
To  this  it  must  be  added  that  the  whole  of  Christian  antiquity  knew  nothing  of  these  three 
documents,  which  only  exist  in  the  codex  at  Verona,  so  that  we  cannot  acknowledge  them 
as  p-enuine." 


1  Athanas.  Apol.  contra  Arian.,  c.  44. 
-  Hilar.  Fragm.,  t.  ii.,  1283. 

3  Theodoret.  Hist.  Eccl,  Lib.  II.,  cap.  C. 

4  Athanas.  Apol.  etr.  Arian.,  c.  37,  and  again  in  chapter  41 
(this  last,  which  is  really  the  same,  is  addressed  to  the  bishops  of 
Egypt  and  Libya). 


*  Hilar.  Fragment.,  Tom.  ii. 

a  Bower.  Hist.  Popes,  in  loc. 

7  Fuchs'  Bibliothe  der  Kirchen  vers.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  138  (cit.  by  Hef.) 

s  Hefele,  History  Councils,  vol.  ii.,  p.  106. 


SARDICA.     A.D.  343  or  344  433 

EXCURSUS  AS  TO  WHETHER  THE  SARDICAN  COUNCIL  WAS  ECUMENICAL. 

Some  theologians  and  canonists  have  been  of  opinion  that  the  Council  of  Sardica  was 
Ecumenical  and  would  reckon  it  as  the  Second.  But  besides  the  fact  that  such  a  numbering 
is  absolutely  in  contrariety  to  all  history  it  also  labours  under  the  difficulty,  as  we  shall  see 
presently,  that  the  Westerns  by  insisting  that  St.  Athanasius  should  have  a  seat  caused  a 
division  of  the  synod  at  the  very  outset,  so  that  the  Easterns  met  at  Philippopolis  and  con- 
firmed the  deposition  of  the  Saint.  It  is  also  interesting  to  remember  that  when  Alexander 
Natalis  in  his  history  expressly  called  this  synod  ecumenical,  the  passage  was  marked  with 
disapproval  by  the  Roman  censors. 

(Hefele.     Hist.  Councils.   Vol.  II.,  pp.  172  et  seqq.) 

The  ecumenical  character  of  this  Synod  certainly  cannot  be  proved.1  It  is  indeed  true 
that  it  was  the  design  of  Pope  Julius,  as  well  as  of  the  two  Emperors,  Constantius  and  Con- 
stans,  to  summon  a  General  Council  at  Sardica  ;  but  we  do  not  find  that  any  such  actually 
took  place :  and  the  history  of  the  Church  points  to  many  like  cases,  where  a  synod  was 
probably  intended  to  be  ecumenical,  and  yet  did  not  attain  that  character.  In  the  present 
case,  the  Eastern  and  Western  bishops  were  indeed  summoned,  but  by  far  the  greater  num- 
ber of  the  Eastern  bishops  were  Eusebians,  and  therefore  Semi-Arians,  and  instead  of  acting 
in  a  better  mind  in  union  with  the  orthodox,  they  separated  themselves  and  formed  a  cabal 
of  their  own  at  Philippopolis. 

We  cannot  indeed  agree  with  those  who  maintain  that  the  departure  of  the  Eusebians  in 
itself  rendered  it  impossible  for  the  synod  to  be  ecumenical,  or  it  would  be  in  the  power  of 
heretics  to  make  an  Ecumenical  Council  possible  or  not.  We  cannot,  however,  overlook  the 
fact  that,  in  consequence  of  this  withdrawal,  the  great  Eastern  Church  was  far  more  poorly 
represented  at  Sardica,  and  that  the  entire  number  of  bishops  present  did  not  even  amount 
to  a  hundred  !  So  small  a  number  of  bishops  can  only  form  a  General  Council  if  the  great 
body  of  their  absent  colleagues  subsequently  give  their  express  consent  to  what  has  been 
decided.  This  was  not,  however,  the  case  at  the  Synod  of  Sardica.  The  decrees  were  no 
doubt  at  once  sent  for  acceptance  and  signature  to  the  whole  of  Christendom,  but  not  more 
than  about  two  hundred  of  those  bishops  who  had  been  absent  signed,  and  of  these,  ninety- 
four,  or  nearly  half,  were  Egyptians.  Out  of  the  whole  of  Asia  only  a  few  bishops  from  the 
provinces  of  Cyprus  and  Palestine  signed,  not  one  from  the  other  Eastern  provinces ;  and 
even  from  the  Latin  Church  in  Africa,  which  at  that  time  numbered  at  least  three  hundred 
bishops,  we  meet  with  very  few  names.  We  cannot  give  much  weight  to  the  fact  that  the 
Emperor  Constantius  refused  to  acknowledge  the  decrees  of  Sardica :  it  is  of  much  greater 
importance  that  no  single  later  authority  declared  it  to  be  a  General  Council.  Natalis  Alex- 
ander2 is  indeed  of  opinion  that  because  Pope  Zosimus,  in  the  year  417  or  418,  cited  the 
fifth  canon  of  Sardica  as  Nicene,  and  a  synod  held  at  Constantinople  in  382  cited  the  sixth 
as  Nicene,  the  synod  must  evidently  have  been  considered  as  an  appendix  to  that  of  Nicea, 
and  therefore  its  equal,  that  is,  must  have  been  honoured  as  ecumenical.  But  we  have 
already  shown  how  Zosimus  and  the  bishops  of  Constantinople  had  been  led  into  this  con- 
fusion from  the  defects  of  their  manuscript  collections  of  the  canons.  Athanasius,  Sulpicius 
Severus,  Socrates,  and  the  Emperor  Justinian  were  cited  in  later  times  for  the  ecumenical 
character  of  this  synod.  Athanasius  calls  it  a  /xeyakr)  owoSo? ;  Sulpicius  Severus  says  it  was 
ex  toto  orbe  convocata ;  and  Socrates  relates  that  "Athanasius  and  other  bishops  had  demanded 
an  Ecumenical  Synod,  and  that  of  Sardica  had  been  then  summoned.3   It  is  clear  at  the  first 

1  Hefele  refers  to  his  having  himself  treated  this  matter  fully  in  I  2Nat  Alex.    H.  E„  sec.  iv.,  Diss,  xxvij.,  Art.  3. 

the  TheoUgischer  Quartalschrift  of  Tubingen,  1852.  I  8  Socrates.    U,  £'.,  Lib.  ii.,  cap.  20. 

F  f  2 


430  SARDICA.     A.D.  343  on  344 

glance  that  the  two  last  authorities  only  prove  that  the  Synod  had  been  intended  to  be  a 
general  one,  and  the  expression  "  Great  Synod,"  used  by  Athanasius,  cannot  be  taken  as 
simply  identical  with  ecumenical.  While,  however,  the  Emperor  Justinian,  in  his  edict  of 
346,  on  the  Three  Chapters,  calls  the  Synod  of  Sardica  ecumenical,  he  yet,  in  the  same  edict, 
as  well  as  in  other  places,  does  not  reckon  it  among  the  General  Councils,  of  which  he  counts 
four.  To  this  must  be  added,  first,  that  the  Emperor  is  not  the  authority  entitled  to  decide 
as  to  the  character  of  an  Ecumenical  Synod  ;  and  secondly,  that  the  expression  Universale 
Concilium  was  employed  in  a  wider  sense  in  speaking  of  those  synods  which,  without  being 
general,  represented  a  whole  patriarchate. 

The  Trullan  Synod  and  Pope  Nicholas  I.  are  further  appealed  to.  The  former  in  its 
second  canon  approved  of  the  Sardican  canons,  and  Pope  Nicholas  said  of  them :  "  omnis 
Eeelesia  rccepit  eos."  But  this  in  no  way  contains  a  declaration  that  the  Synod  of  Sardica  was 
ecumenical,  for  the  canons  of  many  other  councils  also — for  instance,  Ancyra,  Neocsesarea, 
and  others — were  generally  received  without  those  synods  themselves  being  therefore 
esteemed  ecumenical.  Nay,  the  Trullan  Synod  itself  speaks  for  us  ;  for  had  it  held  the 
Synod  of  Sardica  to  be  the  second  General  Council,  it  would  have  placed  its  canons  immedi- 
ately after  those  of  Nice,  whereas  they  are  placed  after  the  four  ancient  General  Councils, 
and  from  this  we  see  that  the  Trullan  Synod  did  not  reckon  the  Sardican  among  those 
councils,  but  after  them.  To  this  it  must  be  added  that  the  highest  Church  authorities 
speak  most  decidedly  against  the  synod  being  ecumenical.  We  may  appeal  first  to  Augus- 
tine, who  only  knew  of  the  Eusebian  assembly  at  Sardica,  and  nothing  at  all  of  an  orthodox 
synod  in  that  place  ;  which  would  have  been  clearly  impossible,  if  it  had  at  that  time  been 
counted  among  the  ecumenical  synods.  Pope  Gregory  the  Great  '  and  St.  Isidore  of  Seville2 
speak  still  more  plainly.  They  only  know  of  four  ancient  General  Councils — those  of  Nice, 
Constantinople,  Ejthesus,  and  Chalcedon.  The  objection  of  the  Ballerini  that  Gregory  and 
Isidore  did  not  intend  to  enumerate  the  most  ancient  general  synods  as  such,  but  only  those 
which  issued  important  dogmatic  decrees,  is  plainly  quite  arbitrary,  and  therefore  without 
force.  Under  such  circumstances  it  is  natural  that  among  the  later  scholars  by  far  the 
great  majority  should  have  answered  the  question,  whether  the  Synod  of  Sardica  is  ecumen- 
ical, in  the  negative,  as  have  Cardinal  Bellarmin,  Peter  de  Marca,  Edmund  Richer,  Fleury, 
Orsi,  Sacharelli,  Tillemont,  Du  Pin,  Berti,  Ruttenstock,  Bohrbacher,  Bemi  Ceillier,  Stolberg, 
Neander,  and  others.  On  the  other  hand,  Baronius.  Natalis  Alexander,  the  brothers  Ballerini, 
Mansi,  and  Palma 3  have  sought  to  maintain  the  ecumenical  character  of  the  synod,  but  as 
early  as  the  seventeenth  century  the  Roman  censors  condemned  the  direct  assertions  of 
Natalis  Alexander  on  the  subject. 

1  Greg.  M.     Lib.  ii.,  Epist.  10.  |      » Jno.  Bapt.  Palma.     Proeleclinnes  Hist.  Eccl.  quas  in  Collegio 

2Isidor.    Hispal.    Mymolog.,  Lib.  vi.,  cap.  16.  \  Vrbano habuit.    Rome,  1838.    Tom.  i.,  P.  ii.,  p.  85. 


THE  CANONS  OP  THE  CCXVH  BLESSED    FATHERS   WHO 
ASSEMBLED  AT  CARTHAGE. 

COMMONLY  CALLED 

THE  CODE  OF  CANONS  OF  THE  AFEICAN  CHUKCH. 

A.D.  419 

Elenchus. 
Introductory  Note.  The  Cmms  wM  (he  ^^  ^.^  ^  ^ 


INTBODUCTOBY  NOTE. 

An  attempt  to  write  a  commentary  upon  all  the  canons  of  the  African  Code,  would  have 
meant  nothing  less  than  the  preparation  of  one  volume  or  more  on  the  canon  law  of  the 
West.  This  is  impossible  and  therefore,  interesting  as  the  field  would  be,  I  have  been  com- 
pelled to  restrain  my  pen,  and  rather  than  give  a  scant  and  insufficient  annotation,  I  have 
contented  myself  with  providing  the  reader  with  as  good  a  translation  as  I  have  been  able 
to  make  of  the  very  corrupt  Latin  (correcting  it  at  times  by  the  Greek),  and  have  added  the 
Ancient  Epitome  and  the  quaint  notes  in  full  of  John  Johnson  from  the  Second  Edition,  of 
1714,  of  his  "  Clergyman's  Vade-mecum,"  Pt.  II.,  which  occupy  little  space,  but  may  not 
be  easily  reached  by  the  ordinary  reader.  The  student  will  find  full  scholia  on  these  Canons 
in  Van  Espen  in  the  Latin,  and  in  Zonaras  and  Balsamon  in  the  Greek.  These  latter  are  in 
Beveridge's  Synodicon. 

Johnson  writes  an  excellent  Introduction  to  his  Epitome  of  these  Canons,  as  follows : 

"  Councils  were  nowhere  more  frequently  called  in  the  Primitive  Times  than  in  Africa. 
In  the  year  418-19,  all  canons  formerly  made  in  sixteen  councils  held  at  Carthage,  one  at 
Milevis,  one  at  Hippo,  that  were  approved  of,  were  read,  and  received  a  new  sanction  from 
a  great  number  of  bishops,  then  met  in  synod  at  Carthage.  This  Collection  is  the  Code  of 
the  African  Church,  which  was  always  in  greatest  repute  in  all  Churches  next  after  the  Code 
of  the  Universal  Church.  This  code  was  of  very  great  authority  in  the  old  English  Churches, 
for  many  of  the  Excerptions  of  Egbert  were  transcribed  from  it.  And  though  the  Code  of 
the  Universal  Church  ends  with  the  canons  of  Chalcedon,1  yet  these  African  Canons  are 
inserted  into  the  Ancient  Code  both  of  the  Eastern  and  Western  Churches.  These  canons 
though  ratified  and  approved  by  a  synod,  yet  seem  to  have  been  divided  or  numbered  by 
some  private  and  unlearned  hand,  and  have  probably  met  with  very  unskilful  transcribers, 
by  which  means  some  of  them  are  much  confounded  and  obscured,  as  to  their  sense  and 
coherence.  They  are  by  Dionysius  Exiguus  and  others  entituled  The  Canons  of  the  Synod 
of  Africa.  And  though  all  were  not  originally  made  at  one  time,  yet  they  were  all  confirmed 
by  one  synod  of  African  bishops,  who,  after  they  had  recited  the  Creed  and  the  twenty  can- 
ons of  the  Council  of  Nice,  proceeded  to  make  new  canons,  and  re-enforce  old  ones." 

In  his  "  Library  of  Canon  Law  "  (Bibliotheca  Juris  Canonici)  Justellus  gives  these  canons, 
and,  in  my  opinion,  gives  them  rightly,  the  title  "  The  Code  of  Canons  of  the  African 
Church"  (Codex  Canonum  Ecclesice  Africaner),  although  Hefele2  describes  them  as  "the  col- 
lection of  those  African  Canons  put  together  in  419  by  Dionysius  Exiguus."  Hefele  says 
that  the  title  Dionysius  gave  them  in  his  collection  was  "  The  Statutes  of  an  African  Coun- 
cil" (S'atuta  Concilii  Africani)  which  would  certainly  be  wholly  inadequate  and  mislead- 
ing ;  but  in  the  edition  of  Dionysius  in  Migne's  Patrologia  Latina  (Tom.  LXVII.,  col.  181) 
in  the  Codex  Canonum  Ecclesiasticoruni  no  such  title  occurs,  but  the  perfectly  accurate  one, 
"  A  Synod  at  Carthage  in  Africa,  which  adopted  one  hundred  and  thirty-eight  canons."  This 
is  an  exact  description  of  what  took  place  and  of  the  origin  of  these  most  important  dog- 
matic and  disciplinary  enactments.  Hefele  must  have  been  thinking  of  Dionysius's  Pre- 
face where  the  expression  does  occur  but  not  as  a  title. 

(Beveridge.     Synodicon,  Tom.  II.,  p.  202.) 

Carthage  was  formerly  the  head  of  the  whole  of  Africa,  as  St.  Augustine  tells  us  in  his 

Epistle  CLXII.     From  this  cause  it  happened  that  a  great  number  of  councils  were  held 

1 1  do  not  understand  what  Johnson  means  by  this  statement.    Vide  Can.  j.  of  Chalcedon. 
2  Hefele.    Hist,  of  the  Councils,  vol.  ii.,  p.  468,  Note  1. 


AF.RICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419  439 


there,  gathered  from  all  the  provinces  of  Africa.  Especially  while  Aurelius  as  Archbishop 
was  occupying  the  throne  were  these  meetings  of  bishops  frequently  holden  ;  and  by  these, 
for  the  establishing  of  ecclesiastical  discipline  in  Africa,  many  canons  were  enacted.  At  last, 
after  the  consulate  of  Honorius  (XII.)  and  Theodosius  (VIII.),  Augustuses,  on  the  eighth 
day  before  the  Calends  of  June,  that  is  to  say,  on  May  25,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  419, 
another  Council  was  held  in  the  same  city  at  which  all  the  canons  previously  adopted  were 
considered,  and  the  greater  part  of  them  were  again  confirmed  by  the  authority  of  the 
synod.  These  canons,  thus  confirmed  by  this  council,  merited  to  be  called  from  that  day 
to  this  "  The  Code  of  Canons  of  the  African  Church."  These  canons  were  not  at  first  adopted 
in  Greek  but  in  Latin,  and  they  were  confirmed  in  the  same  language.  This  Dionysius 
Exiguus  distinctly  testifies  to  in  his  preface  to  the  "Code  of  Ecclesiastical  Canons,"  in  which 
they  are  included.  It  is  uncertain  when  the  canons  of  this  Carthaginian  synod  were  done 
into  Greek.  This  only  is  certain,  that  they  had  been  translated  into  Greek  before  the  Coun- 
cil in  Trullo  by  which,  in  its  Second  Canon,  they  were  received  into  the  Greek  Nomocanon, 
and  were  confirmed  by  the  authority  of  this  synod  ;  so  that  from  that  time  these  canons 
stand  in  the  Eastern  Church  on  an  equality  with  all  the  rest. 

An  extremely  interesting  point  arises  as  to  what  was  the  authority  of  the  collection  as  a 
collection,  and  how  this  collection  was  made  ?  There  seems  no  doubt  that  the  collection 
substantially  as  we  know  it  was  the  code  accepted  by  the  Council  of  Trullo,  the  canons  of 
which  received  a  quasi-ecumenical  authority  from  the  subsequent  general  imprimatur  given 
them  by  the  Seventh  Ecumenical  Council,  the  Second  of  Nice.  Van  Espen  has  considered 
this  point  at  great  length  in  Dissertation  VIII.  of  the  First  Part  of  his  Commentaries,  and  to 
his  pages  I  must  refer  the  reader  for  anything  like  an  adequate  presentation  of  the  matter. 
He  concludes  (§  I.)  that  the  "Code  owes  its  origin  to  this  synod,"  and  argues  against  De 
Marca  in  proof  of  the  proposition  that  the  collection  was  not  the  private  work  of  Dionysius, 
but  the  official  work  of  the  council  by  one  of  its  officials,  concluding  with  the  remark  (§  II.) 
that  "this  was  the  persuasion  both  of  Greeks  and  Latins,  .  .  .  and  these  canons  are  set 
forth  by  Balsamon  with  the  title,  '  The  Canons  of  the  CCXVII.  Blessed  Fathers  who  met 
together  at  Carthage.'" 

In  the  notes  on  each  canon  I  shall  give  the  source,  following  Hefele  in  all  respects  (Hist. 
of  the  Councils,  vol.  ii.,  pp.  468  ct  seqq.),  and  content  myself  here  with  setting  down  a  list  of 
the  various  councils  which  made  the  enactments,  with  their  dates. 

A.D. 

Carthage  (under  Gratus) . . . , , .  345-348 

(under  Genethlius) 387  or  390 

Hippo 393 

I.  Carthage 394 

II.         "         (June  26) „ 397 

III.  "        (August  28) 397 

IV.  "        (April  27) , 399 

V         "         (June  15) 401 

VI.         "        (September  13) 401 

VII.  Milevis  (August  27) 402 

VIII.  Carthage  (August  25). „ 403 

IX.         "  (June) , 404 

X.         "  (August  25) 405 

XI.         "  (June  13) , 407 

XII.  and  XIII.  Carthage  (June  16  and  October  13) 408 


440  AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 

A.D. 

XIV.  Carthage  (June  15) 409 

XV.    "    (June  14) 410 

XVI.    "    (May  1) 418 

XVII.         "  (May  25)  which  adopted  the  African  Code 419 

The  numbering  of  the  African  councils  differs  very  widelj"  between  the  different  writers, 
and  Cave  reckons  nine  between  401  and  608,  and  thirty-five  Carthaginian  between  215  and 
533.1  Very  useful  tables,  shewing  the  conclusions  of  Fuchs,  are  found  at  the  end  of 
Bruns,  Caiwnes  Apostolorum  ct  Conciliorum  Vcterum  Selecti. 

1  need  only  add  that  I  have  frequently  used  Dr.  Bruns's  test,  but  have  not  confined 
myself  to  it  exclusively.  Evidently  in  the  Latin,  as  we  now  have  it,  there  are  many  corrupt 
passages.  In  strange  contradistinction  to  this,  the  Greek  is  apparently  pure  and  is  clear 
throughout.  Possibly  the  Greek  translation  was  made  from  a  purer  Latin  text  than  we 
now  possess. 

AN  ANCIENT  INTRODUCTION. 

(Found  in  Dionysius  Exiguus,  Codex  Can.  Migne,  Pat.  Lat,,  Tom.  lxvii.,  col.  182.) 

After  the  consulate  of  the  most  glorious  emperors,  Honorus  for  the  twelfth  time  and 
Theodosius  for  the  eighth  time,  Augustuses,  on  the  VIII.  before  the  Calends  of  June  at 
Carthage,  in  the  Secretarium  of  the  basilica  of  Faustus,  when  Pope  Aurelius  had  sat  down, 
together  with  Valentine  of  the  primatial  see  of  the  province  of  Numidia,  and  Faustinus  of 
the  Potentine  Church,  of  the  Italian  province  Picenum,  a  legate  of  the  Roman  Church,  and 
also  with  legates  of  the  different  African  provinces,  that  is  to  say,  of  the  two  Numidias,  of 
Byzacena,  of  Mauritania  Csesariensis,  as  well  as  of  Tripoli,  and  with  Vincent  Colositanus, 
Fortunatian,  and  other  bishops  of  the  proconsular  province,  in  all  two  hundred  and  seven- 
teen, also  with  Philip  and  Asellus,  presbyters  and  legates  of  the  Roman  Church,  and  while 
the  deacons  were  standing  by,  Aurelius  the  bishop  said,  etc.,  ut  infra. 

5  J?or  this  statement  I  am  indebted  to  Mr.  Ffoulkes  in  art.  "  African  Councils."    Smith  and  Cheetham,  Diet.  Chrtil.  Antiq. 


THE  CANONS  OF  THE  217  BLESSED  FATHEBS  WHO  ASSEMBLED  AT 

CAETHAGE. 

(Labbe  and  Cossart :   Concilia,  Tom.  II.,  Col.  1041 ;  Dionysius  Ex.,  Codex  Can.  Eeeles. 
[Migne,  Pat.  Zat.,  Tom.  LXVIL]  ;  Bevericlge,  Synodicon  in  loc.) 

Aurelius  THE  Bishop  said  : 1  You,  most  blessed  brethren,  remember  that  after  the  day 
fixed  for  the  synod  we  discussed  many  things  while  we  were  waiting  for  our  brethren 
Avho  now  have  been  sent  as  delegates  aud  have  arrived  at  the  present  synod,  which 
must  be  placed  in  the  acts.  Wherefore  let  us  render  thanks  to  our  Lord  for  the  gather- 
ing together  of  so  great  an  assembly.  It  remains  that  the  acts  of  the  Nicene  Synod 
which  we  now  have,  and  have  been  determined  by  the  fathers,  as  well  as  those  things 
enacted  by  our  predecessors  here,  who  confirmed  that  same  Synod,  or  which  according 
to  the  same  form  have  been  usefully  enacted  by  all  grades  of  the  clergy,  from  the  highest 
even  to  the  lowest,  should  be  brought  forward.  The  whole  Council  said  :  Let  them  be 
brought  forward. 

Daniel  the  Notary  read  :  The  profession  of  faith  or  statutes  of  the  Nicene  Synod 
are  as  follows. 

And  while  he  was  speaking,  Faustinus,  a  bishop  of  the  people  of  Potentia,  of  the 
Italian  province  of  Picenum,  a  legate  of  the  Koman  Church  said  :  There  have  been  en- 
trusted to  us  by  the  Apostolic  See  certain  things  in  writings,  and  certain  other  things 
as  in  ordinances  to  be  treated  of  with  your  blessedness  as  Ave  have  called  to  memory  in 
the  acts  above,  that  is  to  say,  concerning  the  canons  made  at  Nice,  that  their  decrees 
and  customs  be  observed  ;  for  some  things  are  observed  out  of  decree  and  canon,  but 
some  from  custom.  Concerning  these  things  therefore  in  the  first  place  let  us  make  en- 
quiry, if  it  please  your  blessedness  ;  and  afterwards  let  the  other  ordinances  which 
have  been  adopted  or  proposed  be  confirmed  ;  so  that  you  may  be  able  to  show  by  your 
rescripts  to  the  Apostolic  See,  and  that  you  may  declare  to  the  same  venerable  Pope, 
that  we  have  diligently  remembered  these  things  ;  although  the  headings  of  action 
taken  had  been  already  inserted  in  the  acts.2  In  this  matter  we  should  act,  as  I  have 
said  above,  as  shall  please  your  beloved  blessedness.  Let,  therefore  the  commonito- 
rium  come  into  the  midst,  that  ye  may  be  able  to  recognize  what  is  contained  in  it,  so 
that  an  answer  can  be  given  to  each  point. 

Aurelius  said :  Let  the  commonitorium  be  brought  forward,  which  our  brethren 
and  fellow-ministers  lately  placed  in  the  acts,  and  let  the  rest  of  the  things  done  or  to 
be  done,  follow  in  order. 

Daniel  the  Notary  read  the  Commonitorium.  To  our  brother  Faustinus  and  to  our 
sons,  the  presbyters  Philip  and  Asellus,  Zosimus,  the  bishop.  You  well  remember 
that  we  committed  to  you  certain  businesses,  aud  now  [we  bid  you]  carry  out  all  things 
as  if  we  ourselves  were  there  (for),  indeed,  our  presence  is  there  with  you ;  especially 
since  ye  have  this  our  commandment,  and  the  words  of  the  canons  which  for  greater  cer- 
tainty we  have  inserted  in  this  our  commonitory.  For  thus  said  our  brethren  in  the 
Council  of  Nice  when  they  made  these  decrees  concerning  the  appeals  of  bishops  : 

"  But  it  seemed  good  that  if  a  bishop  had  been  accused,  etc."  [Here  folloivs  verba- 
tim Canon  v.  of  Sardica.] 

Ancient  Epitome.  I  benignantly  heard,  the  Roman  bishop  writing  or 

\  ordering. 
If  bishops  shall  have  deposed  a  bishop,  and  if\ 
he  appeal  to   the   Roman   bishop,  he  should   be  I 

And  when  this  had  been  read,  Alypius,  bishop  of  the  Tagastine  Church,  and  legate 
of  the  province  of  Numidia,  said  :     On  this  matter  there  has  been  some  legislation  in 

1  The  reader  must  not  complain  if  he  finds  the  meaning  of  the  |  sage  he  says  that  it  "  is  even  more  ohscure,"  and  that  "  the  text  is 
translation  often  obscure.    So  great  a  scholar  as  Hefele  says  of  [  undoubtedly  corrupt.    The  sense  is  probably,  etc." 
one  of  these  speeches,  "  This,  I  believe,  must  be  the  meaning  of       2 1  have  followed  in  this  passage  the  Greek  text  as  a  trifle  less 
the  somewhat  unintelligible  text,  etc.,"  and  again  of  another  pas-  |  incomprehensible. 


412  AFRICAN  CODE.     A.D.  419 

former  sessions  of  our  council,  and  we  profess  that  we  shall  ever  observe  what  was  de- 
creed by  the  Nicene  Council ;  yet  I  remember  that  when  we  examined  the  Greek 
copies  of  this  Nicene  Synod,  Ave  did  not  find  these  the  words  quoted — Why  this  was  the 
case,  I  am  sure  I  do  not  know.  For  this  reason  we  beg  your  reverence,  holy  Pope 
Aurelius,  that,  as  the  authentic  record  of  the  decrees  of  the  Council  of  Nice  are  said  to  be 
preserved  in  the  city  of  Constantinople,  you  would  deign  to  send  messengers  with 
letters  from  your  Holiness,  and  not  only  to  our  most  holy  brother  the  bishop  of  Con- 
stantinople, but  also  to  the  venerable  bishops  of  Alexandria  and  Antioch,  who  shall 
send  to  us  the  decrees  of  that  council  with  the  authentification  of  their  signatures,  so 
that  hereafter  all  ambiguity  should  be  taken  away,  for  we  failed  to  find  the  words  cited 
by  our  brother  Faustinus ;  notwithstanding  this  however  we  promise  to  be  ruled  by 
them  for  a  short  time,  as  I  have  already  said,  until  reliable  copies  come  to  hand. 
Moreover  the  venerable  bishop  of  the  Koman  Church,  Boniface,  should  be  asked  like- 
Avise  to  be  good  enough  to  send  messengers  to  the  aforementioned  churches,  Avho  should 
have  the  same  copies  according  to  his  rescript,  but  the  copies  of  the  aforementioned 
Nicene  Council  Avhich  we  have,  Ave  place  in  these  Acts. 

Faustinus  the  bishop,  legate  of  the  Roman  Church,  said :  Let  not  your  holiness  do 
dishonour  to  the  Roman  Church,  either  in  this  matter  or  in  any  other,  by  saying  the 
canons  are  doubtful,  as  our  brother  and  fellow-bishop  Alypius  has  vouchsafed  to  say : 
but  do  you  deign  to  write  these  things  to  our  holy  and  most  blessed  pope,  so  that  he 
seeking  out  the  genuine  canons,  can  treat  with  your  holiness  on  all  matters  decreed. 
But  it  suffices  that  the  most  blessed  bishop  of  the  city  of  Rome  should  make  enquiry 
just  as  your  holiness  proposes  doing  on  your  part,  that  there  may  not  seem  to  have  arisen 
any  contention  between  the  Churches,  but  that  ye  may  the  rather  be  enabled  to  deliberate 
Avith  fraternal  charity,  Avhen  he  has  been  heard  from,  Avhat  is  best  should  be  observed. 

Aurelius  the  bishop  said :  In  addition  to  what  is  set  down  in  the  acts,  Ave,  by  the 
letters  from  our  insignificance,  must  more  fully  inform  our  holy  brother  and  fellow-bishop 
Boniface  of  everything  which  Ave  have  considered.  Therefore  if  our  plan  pleases  all, 
let  us  be  informed  of  this  by  the  mouth  of  all.  And  the  Avhole  council  said :  It  seems 
good  to  us. 

NoA-atus  the  bishop,  legate  of  Mauritania  Sitifensis,  said  :  We  uoav  call  to  mind  that 
there  is  contained  in  this  commonitory  something  about  presbyters  and  deacons,  hoAV 
they  should  be  tried  by  their  oavu  bishops  or  by  those  adjoiniug,  a  provision  which  Ave 
find  nothing  of  in  the  Nicene  Council.  For  this  cause  let  your  holiness  order  this  part 
to  be  read. 

Aurelius  the  bishop  said :  Let  the  place  asked  for  be  read.  Daniel  the  notary  read 
as  folloAvs  :  Concerning  the  appeals  of  clergymen,  that  is  of  those  of  inferior  rank,  there 
is  a  sure  answer  of  this  very  synod,  concerning  Avhich  thing  Avhat  ye  should  do,  we  think 
should  be  inserted,  as  folloAvs  : 

"  Hosius  the  bishop  said  :  I  should  not  conceal  what  has  come  into  my  mind  up  to 
this  time.  If  any  bishop  perchance  has  been  quickly  angered  (a  thing  Avhat  should  not 
happen)  and  has  acted  quickly  or  sharply  against  a  presbyter  or  a  deacon  of  his,  and 
has  Avished  to  drive  him  out  of  the  Church,  provision  should  be  made  that  the  innocent 
be  not  condemned,  or  be  deprived  of  communion  :  he  that  has  been  ejected  should  have 
the  right  of  appeal  to  the  bishops  of  the  bordering  dioceses,  that  his  case  should  be 
heard,  and  it  should  be  carried  on  all  the  more  diligently  because  to  him  who  asks  a 
hearing  it  should  not  be  denied.  And  the  bishop  Avho  either  justly  or  unjustly  rejected 
him,  should  patiently  alloAv  the  affair  to  be  discussed,  so  that  his  sentence  be  either  ap- 
proved or  else  emended,  etc." 

NOTES. 
Ancient  Epitome.  This  is  the  first  part  of  Canon  xiv.  of  Sar- 

A  presbyter  or  deacon  who  has  been  cut  off,  ■  <*iea,  as  tlie  cauon  previously  quoted  is  Canon 
has  the  privilege  of  appealing  to  the  neighbouring  .,  Y-  °^  the  same  synod. 
bishops.     Moreover,  he  ivho  cut  him  off  should  j 
bear  with  equanimity  the  conclusion  arrived  at,    ' 


yovu-  vote      The  whole  Com/    3  » S"&  7™  f  ■  B«™  «  ft.  corfnSL  rf 
Council  pleases  as  all.    JoctiUrli,s  tl  „ i  •  J       I ,,  at  has  beeu  ordained  by  the  Nire,,« 

!™  f  Byzaeena,  S^'tateZel  tythe^  °f  S«.  %*  of  £ 

particular  be  violated.  aecieecl  by  the  Nicene  Council  cannot  in  any 

*£«ffi  »^Jt^ff&  Sd:-S°  *  -  ^  Sloped 

mto  question.     Therefore,  that      Le  nay  be  EnT  W  themse1^  ^ve  been  Sought 
let  your  holiness  deign  to  refer  ihpJS    f  ™°ny  between  us  and  your  blessedness 
man  Church,  that  he  may  be  able  tn?   V°  ^e  ^  aud  venerable  bishop  of  the S 

Messed  see  he  h^ed,  «  this  ^^tt^l^^tVi^T 

Ancient  Epitome 
Since  the  loritten  decrees  of  the  Ni  cene  Co  unrill  himof Al^  i'Sh°P  ¥  Cons^tinople  and  to 
have  not  heen  found,  let  the  Bonr^^^Zel^n^  "*  "  US  *"~  **«  *•  «■ 

Aurelius  the  bishon  MiJ.   ad         i 
f~P^rftheBtataieBA^i^0^lfiig^  *?  70ur  e^nty,  pray  allow  the 
those  things  what  have  been  most  hea Shful  1  v  /J^i  and  *?serted  *  the  acts,  as  well  as 
according  to  the  rule  of  that  council    and 1      wf  •  T  ^^  ^  0™'  Predecessois 
And  the  whole  council  said  :  The  copies  of  tht  r      5  ^  h,ave  beeu  ordai»ed  by  us' 
Synod  which  formerly  were  broueh ■  tc  n      ,       (5*5?'  and  tlle  statufces  of  the  Nicene 
ory  the  predecessor  if  your  holh less (who      ^  ^T^  feiI^ofbleSS£ 
the  decrees  made  by  the  Fathers  in  thii  p   °    Tf  *?*"#  at  jt  »  as  we"  as  the  copies  of 
creed  by  our  common  consulta  i01  sh  ?1 "   J  f?llo™g  them,  or  which  now  we  hTve  de 
that  (as  has  been  already  ^^bfe£^™^  *  these  ecclesiastical  acts  so" 
venerable  men  of  the  Church  of  Antioc and  o    tfcT  JT^  to  Write  to  ^ose  most 
Constantinople,  that  they  would  sen  lm  ost.ln     f       of.  AIexail^-ia,  and  also  of  that  of 
of  Nice  under  the  authentication  o  <    £eir  sS If  ^T*  ?f-  ^  decrees  of  &*  Cou,  d 
having  become  evident,  those  chapters whiS  f    «*'  bj  Whlch'  tlle  truth  of  the  matter 
present,  and  fellow-bishop  Fans  £  as  well N,f      %  <?nunonitffl7  our  brother  who  is 
Ins  brought  with  them,  if  they  be St.?*  1       •      °U1*  'ellow-presbyters  Philip  and  Ase 

The  Profession  of  Faith  nf  tin  v         /v 
#    We  believe  in  o/e  God  e£  "^  °°ta^  „     .,  , 

etc->     ■     •     •     anathematize  them.'     '     '     and  lu  tlie  Holy  Ghost,     But  those  who  say, 

*-^^  twenty  heads  were  likewise  read  as  arc 

inserted  in  the  present  acts.         ^  ^  Were  Pro^gated  in  the  African  Synods J  were 


444 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


CANON  I. 

That  the  statutes  of  the  Nicene  Council  are  to  be  scrupulously  observed. 

Aueelius  the  bishop  said:  Such  are  the  statutes  of  the  Niceue  Council,  which  our 
fathers  at  that  time  brought  back  with  them  :  and  preserving  this  form,  let  these  things 
which  follow,  adopted  and  confirmed  by  us,  be  kept  firm. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  I. 


Let  the  copies  of  the  decrees  of  the  Nicene 
Council  which  our  fathers  brought  back  icith 
them  from  that  synod,  be  observed. 


Johnson. 


It  is  certain  that  Ctecilian,  then  Bishop  of 
Carthage,  was  present  at  the  Council  of  Nice  ; 
that  any  other  African  bishop  was  there  does 
not  appear  ;  but  probably  he  was  attended 
with  several  clergyman,  who  were  afterwards 
ordained  bishops. 


CANON  II. 

Of  Preaching  the  Trinity. 

The  whole  Council  said  :  By  the  favour  of  God,  by  a  unanimous  confession  the 
Church's  faith  which  through  us  is  handed  down  should  be  confessed  in  this  glorious 
assembly  before  anything  else ;  then  the  ecclesiastical  order  of  each  is  to  be  built  up 
and  strengthened  by  the  consent  of  all.  That  the  minds  of  our  brethren  and  fellow 
bishops  lately  elevated  may  be  strengthened,  those  things  should  be  propounded  which 
Ave  have  certainly  received  from  our  fathers,  as  the  unity  of  the  Trinity,  which  we  retain 
consecrated  in  our  senses,  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  which 
has  no  difference,  as  we  say,2  so  we  shall  instruct  the  people  of  God.  Moreover  by  all 
the  bishops  lately  promoted  it  was  said :  So  we  openly  confess,  so  we  hold,  so  we 
teach,  following  the  Evangelic  faith  and  your  teaching. 


NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  II. 
No  difference  is  recognised  or  taught  by  the 
decrees  of  the  Council  of  Nice  between  the  Per- 
sons of  the  Holy  Trinity. 


This  canon,  or  rather  introduction,  is  taken 
from  Canon  j.,  of  the  Council  of  Carthage 
held  under  Genethlius,  a.d.  387  or  390.1 


CANON  III. 

Of  Continence.  , 

Aueelius  the  bishop  said:  When  at  the  past  council  the  matter  on  continency  and 
chastity  was  considered,  those  three  grades,  which  by  a  sort  of  bond  are  joined  to  chas- 
tity by  their  consecration,  to  wit  bishops,  presbyters,  and  deacons,  so  it  seemed  that  it 
was  becoming  that  the  sacred  rulers  and  priests  of  God  as  well  as  the  Levites,  or  those 
who  served  at  the  divine  sacraments,  should  be  continent  altogether,  by  which  they 
would  be  able  with  singleness  of  heart  to  ask  what  they  sought  from  the  Lord  :  so  that 
what  the  apostles  taught  and  antiquity  kept,  that  we  might  also  keep. 

NOTES. 
Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  III.  This  canon  is  taken  from  Canon  ij.,  of 

Let  a  bishop,  a  presbyter,   and  a  deacon  be  Carthage  387  or  390. 
chaste  and  continent. 


1  Iu  assigning  these  canons  to  the  several  synod9  that  adopted  them,  I  have  simply  followed  Hefele.       2  Or  "have  learned." 


AFEICAN  CODE.     A.D.  419  445 

CANON  IV. 

Of  the  different  orders  that  shoidd  abstain  from  their  ivives. 

Faustinus,  the  bishop  of  the  Potentiue  Church,  in  the  province  of  Picenum,  a 
legate  of  the  Roman  Church,  said :  It  seems  good  that  a  bishop,  a  presbyter,  and  a 
deacon,  or  whoever  perform  the  sacraments,  should  be  keepers  of  modesty  and  should 
abstain  from  their  wives. 

By  all  the  bishops  it  was  said :  It  is  right  that  all  who  serve  the  altar  should  keep 
pudicity  from  all  women. 

NOTES. 
Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  IV. 

Let  those  icho  pray  abstain  from  their  wives 
that  they  may  obtain  their  petitions. 


This   canon   is   taken   from   Canon   ij.,  of 
Carthage  387  or  390,  last  mentioned. 


Johnson. 

See  Canon  XXV.  "  Abstain  from  their 
wives,"  i.e.  Some  time  before  and  after  the 
Eucharist,  as  the  old  Scholiasts  understand 
it.  [i.e.  the  Greek  scholiasts,  but  see  notes  to 
Canon  xiij.  of  Quinisext.] 


CANON  V. 

Of  Avarice. 

Aueelius,  the  bishop,  said :  The  cupidity  of  avarice  (which,  let  no  one  doubt,  is  the 
mother  of  all  evil  things),  is  to  be  henceforth  prohibited,  lest  anyone  should  usurp  an- 
other's limits,  or  for  gain  should  pass  beyond  the  limits  fixed  by  the  fathers,  nor  shall  it 
be  at  all  lawful  for  any  of  the  clergy  to  receive  usury  of  any  kind.  And  those  new  edicts 
(suggestiones)  which  are  obscure  and  generally  ambiguous,  after  they  have  been  ex- 
amined by  us,  will  have  their  value  fixed  (formam  acciphmt) ;  but  with  regard  to  those 
upon  which  the  Divine  Scripture  hath  already  most  j)lainly  given  judgment,  it  is  un- 
necessary that  further  sentence  should  be  pronounced,  but  what  is  already  laid  clown  is 
to  be  carried  out.  And  what  is  reprehensible  in  laymen  is  worthy  of  still  more  severe 
censure  in  the  clergy.  The  whole  synod  said :  No  one  hath  gone  contrary  to  what  is 
said  in  the  Prophets  and  in  the  Gospels  with  impunity. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  V.  j  evil  did  seem  to  have  been  removed.     Dona- 

As  the  taking  of  am,  kind  of  usury  is  con-  j tist  worship  was  prohibited  by  the  imperial 

demned  in  laymen,  much  more  'is  it  condemned  ^w  and  it  was  not  until  the  times  of  Con 


in  clergymen. 

This  canon  is  made  up  of  Canons  x.  and 


stans  and  Constantius  that  it  again  openly 
asserted  itself.  The  synod  while  in  session 
also  took  advantage  of   the    opportunity    of 


xiij.    of  the  Synod  of  Carthage  held  under '  passing  some  useful  general  canons  on  dis 

1  cipline. 

Johnson. 

See  Canon  of  the  Apostles  36  (44)  ;  Nic.  17. 


Gratus  in  a.d.  345-348.  This  synod  was  held 
to  return  thanks  for  the  ending  of  the  Do- 
natist  schism  ;  and  indeed  for  some  time  the 


CANON  VI. 
That  the  chrism  shoidd  not  be  made  by  presbyters. 

Fortunatus  the  bishop,  said  :  In  former  councils  Ave  remember  that  it  was  decreed 
that  the  chrism  or  the  reconciliation  of  penitents,  as  also  the  consecration  of  virgins  be 
not  done  by  presbyters :  but  should  anyone  be  discovered  to  have  done  this,  what 
ought  we  to  decree  with  regard  to  him  ? 

Aurelius  the  bishop  said  :  Your  worthiness  has  heard  the  suggestion  of  our  brother 
and  fellow-bishop  Fortunatus  ;  What  answer  will  you  give  ? 


44  u 


AF1UCAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


And  all  the  bishops  replied :  Neither  the  making  of  the  chrism,  nor  the  consecra- 
tion of  virgins,  is  to  be  done  by  presbyters,  nor  is  it  permitted  to  a  presbyter  to  recon- 
cile anyone  in  the  public  mass  {in  publica  missa),  this  is  the  pleasure  of  all  of  us. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VI. 


Let  no  presbyter  make  the  chrism,  nor  prepare 
the  miction,  nor  consecrate  virgins,  nor  publicly 
reconcile  anyone  to  communion. 

This  is  Canon  iij.  of  the  Carthaginian  Syn- 
od under  Genethlius,  a.d.  387  or  390. 

Johnson. 

Not  the  chrism  used  upon  persons  at  their 
baptism,  says  the  scholion  in  Bishop  Bever- 
idge's  Annotation,  but  the  Mystical  Chrism, 


viz.,  that  used  at  Confirmation ;  though 
neither  was. the  chrism  used  at  baptism  to 
be  consecrated  by  Priests.  See  Deer,  of 
Gelasius  G. 

Du  Pin  observes,  That  this  is  one  of  the 
first  monuments  where  the  name  of  "  mass  " 
occurs  to  signify  the  public  prayers,  which 
the  church  made  at  offering  the  Eucharist. 
And  let  the  reader  observe,  that  there  is  no 
mention  of  the  "  mass  "  in  the  copies  which 
the  Greeks  made  use  of.  And  further,  he 
restrains  the  meaning  of  the  word  "  mass  " 
too  much,  when  he  supposes  that  it  denoted 
the  Communion  Office  only. 


CANON  YII. 

Concerning  those  who  are  reconciled  in  peril  of  death. 

Aukelius  the  bishop  said :  If  anyone  had  fallen  into  peril  of  death  during  the  ab- 
sence of  the  bishop,  and  had  sought  to  reconcile  himself  to  the  divine  altars,  the  pres- 
byter should  consult  the  bishop,  and  so  reconcile  the  sick  man  at  his  bidding,  which 
thing  we  should  strengthen  with  healthy  counsel.  By  all  the  bishops  it  was  said; 
Whatever  your  holiness  has  taught  us  to  be  necessary,  that  is  our  pleasure. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  VII. 
A  priest  desiring  to  reconcile  anyone  in  peril 
to  the  sacred  altars  must  consult  the  bishop  and 
do  what  seems  good  to  him. 


NOTES. 

This  is  Canon  iv.  of  the  Synod  of  387  or 
390. 

Johnson. 
See  Canon  43. 


CANON  VIII. 


Of  those  xoho  make  acctisation  against  an  elder 
to  bring  a  charge  against  a  bishop. 


and  that  no  criminal  is  to  be  suffered 


Numidius,  the  bishop  of  Maxula,  said :  Moreover,  there  are  very  many,  not  of  good 
life,  who  think  that  their  elders  or  bishops  should  be  the  butt  for  accusation ;  ought 
such  to  be  easily  admitted  or  no  ?  Aurelius  the  bishop  said  :  Is  it  the  pleasure  of  your 
charity  that  he  who  is  ensnared  by  divers  wickednesses  should  have  no  voice  of  accu- 
sation against  these  ? 

All  the  bishops  said :  If  he  is  criminous,  his  accusation  is  not  to  be  received. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VIII. 
It  has  seemed  good  that  they  who  are  them- 
selves defendants  for  crimes  should  not  bring 
accusations ;   nor  should  they  be  allowed  to  lay 
crimes  to  anyone's  charge. 

This  is  Canon  vi.  of  Genethlius's  Synod  at 
Carthage,  a.d.  387  or  390. 


Johnson. 
See  Canons  132  and  133  and  Constantinople 
Canon  6. 

[The  "  elders "  mentioned  in  this  canon 
are]  ju'obably  the  same  with  senes  in  other 
canons,  viz.,  Metropolitans,  as  is  generally 
believed.    The  Latin  here  calls  them  Majores 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


447 


natu,  the  Greek  varipas.  Bishop  Beveridge 
supposes  that  the  word  denotes  bishop,  though 
perhaps  Majores  natu  may  signify  presbyters. 


Justellus  on  the  canon  produces  some  seem- 
ing authorities  for  this. 


CANON  IX. 

Of  those  who  on  account  of  their  deeds  are  justly  cast  forth  from  the  congregation  of 
the  Church. 

Augustine  the  bishop,  the  legate  of  the  Numidian  province,  said :  Deign  to  enact 
that  if  any  perchance  have  been  rightly  on  account  of  their  crimes  cast  forth  from  the 
Church,  and  shall  have  been  received  into  communion  by  some  bishop  or  presbyter, 
such  shall  be  considered  as  guilty  of  an  equal  crime  with  them  who  flee  away  from  the 
judgment  of  their  own  bishop.  And  all  the  bishops  said  :  This  is  the  pleasure  of 
all  of  us. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  IX. 
Let  him  be  excommunicated  who  communi- 
cates with  one  excommunicated. 


This  is  Canon  vii.  of  the  same  synod  of 
387  or  390. 


CANON  X. 

Of  'presbyters  who  arc  corrected  by  their  own  bishops. 

Alypius  the  bishop,  a  legate  of  the  province  of  Numidia,  said :  Nor  should  this  be 
passed  over ;  if  by  chance  any  presbyter  when  corrected  by  his  bishop,  inflamed  by 
self-conceit  or  pride,  has  thought  fit  to  offer  sacrifices  to  God  separately  [from  the 
authority  of  the  bishop]  or  has  believed  it  right  to  erect  another  altar,  contrary  to 
ecclesiastical  faith  and  discipline,  such  should  not  get  off  with  impunity.  Valentine, 
of  the  primatial  see  of  the  province  of  Numidia,  said :  The  propositions  made  by  our 
brother  Alypius  are  of  necessity  congruous  to  ecclesiastical  discipline  and  faith ;  there- 
fore enact  what  seems  good  to  your  belovedness. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  X. 


If  one  condemned  by  his  bishop  shall  separate 
himself  and  set  up  an  altar  or  make  the  offering 
he  should  be  punished. 

Aeistenus. 

Whoever  has  been  cut  off  by  his  own  bishop 
and  does  not  go  to  the  synod  to  which  his 
bishop  is  subject,  that  an  examination  may  be 
made  of  the  grounds  of  his  cutting  off,  and 
that  whatever  is  contrary  to  justice  may  be 
corrected ;  but,  puffed  up  with  pride  and  con- 


ceit,  shall  despise  the   synod  and   separate  |  that  of  Gangra  6. 


himself  from  the  Church,  and  shall  set  up 
another  altar,  and  shall  offer  to  God  the  holy 
gifts ;  such  an  one  shall  not  be  allowed  to  go 
on  with  impunity,  since  he  is  acting  contrary 
to  the  faith  and  constitution  of  the  Church ; 
but  he  is  to  be  stricken  with  anathema. 

This  and  the  following  canon  are  Canon 
viii.  of  the  so  often  mentioned  synod  of  387 
or  390. 

Johnson. 

See  Canon  of  the  Apostles  24  (or  32)  and 


CANON  XL 

If  any  presbyter,  inflated  against  his  bishop,  makes  a  schism,  let  him  be  anathema. 

All  the  bishops  said :  If  any  presbyter  shall  have  been  corrected  by  his  superior,  he 
should  ask  the  neighbouring  bishops  that  his  cause  be  heard  by  them  and  that  through 
them  he  may  be  reconciled  to  his  bishop :  but  if  he  shall  not  have  done  this,  but,  puffed 
up  with  pride,  (which  may  God  forbid !)  he  shall  have  thought  it  proper  to  separate  him- 
self from  the  communion  of  his  bishop,  and  separately  shall  have  offered  the  sacrifice  to 


448 


AFRICAN  CODE.     AD.  419 


God,  and  made  a  schism  •with  certain  accomplices,  let  him  be  anathema,  and  let  him 
lose  his  place ;  and  if  the  complaint  which  he  brought  against  his  bishop  shall  [not] 
have  been  found  to  be  well  founded,  an  enquiry  should  be  instituted. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  or  Canon  XI. 
A  Presbyter  condemned  by  his  bishop,  is  al- 
lowed to  appeal  to  the  neighbouring  bishops:  but 
if  he  shall  not  make  any  appeal,  but  shall  maize 
a  schism,  and  be  elated  with  conceit  and  shall  offer 
the  Holy  Gifts  to  God,  let  him  be  anathema. 


See  note  to  last  canon.  The  last  clause  is 
certainly  corrupt ;  in  the  council  of  Carthage 
at  which  it  was  first  adopted  there  is  no 
"  non,"  making  the  meaning  clear. 


CANON  XII. 

If  any  bishop  out  of  Synod  time  shall  have  fallen  under  accusation,  let  his  cause  be 
heard  by  12  bishops. 

Felix  the  bishop,  said :  I  suggest,  according  to  the  statutes  of  the  ancient  councils, 
that  if  any  bishop  (which  may  God  forbid !)  shall  have  fallen  under  any  accusation,  and 
there  shall  have  been  too  great  necessity  to  wait  for  the  summoning  of  a  majority  of  the 
bishops,  that  he  may  not  rest  under  accusation,  let  his  cause  be  heard  by  12  bishops  ; 
and  let  a  presbyter  be  heard  by  six  bishops  with  his  own  bishop,  and  a  deacon  shall  be 
heard  by  three. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XII. 
When  a  bishop  is  to  be  tried,  if  the  ivhole 
synod  does  not  sit,. let  at  least  twelve  bishops 
take  up  the  matter  ;  and  for  the  case  of  a  pres- 
byter, six  and  his  oion  diocesan  ;  and  for  the 
case  of  a  deacon,  three. 

This  is  Canon  x.  of  the  Synod  of  Geneth- 
lius. 

Johnson. 

Hereby  must  be  meant  African  canons  ; 
that  under  Gratus  [a.d.  348]  had  decreed  the 
same  thing. 


Who  was  the  bishop's  judge  at  the  first  in- 
stance does  not  appear  by  this  canon  ;  but  it 
is  natural  to  suppose  it  was  the  Primate.  It 
is  probable  that  this  canon  is  to  be  under- 
stood of  hearing  upon  an  appeal,  because  it  is 
certain  that  a  priest's  cause,  at  the  first  in- 
stance, was  to  be  tried  before  the  bishop  (see 
Can.  10,  11).  And  therefore  the  latter  part 
of  the  canon  can  be  understood  of  no  hearing 
but  by  way  of  appeal,  nor  by  consequence  the 
former.  And  this  seems  more  clear  by  Can. 
Afr.  29. 


CANON  XIII. 

That  a  bishop  should  not  be  ordained  except  by  many  bishops,  but  if  there  should  be 
necessity  he  may  be  ordained  by  three. 

Bishop  Aurelius  said :  What  says  your  holiness  on  this  matter  ?  By  all  the  bishops 
it  was  answered  :  The  decrees  of  the  ancients  must  be  observed  by  us,  to  wit,  that  with- 
out the  consent  of  the  Primate  of  any  province  even  many  bishops  assembled  together 
should  not  lightly  presume  to  ordain  a  bishop.  But  should  there  be  a  necessity,  at  his 
bidding,  three  bishops  should  ordain  him  in  any  place  they  happen  to  be,  and  if  anyone 
contrary  to  his  profession  and  subscription  shall  come  into  any  place  he  shall  thereby 
deprive  himself  of  his  honour. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XIII. 

At  the  bidding  of  the  Primate  even  three  bish- 
ops  can  make  a  bishop.  Put  whoever  goes 
counter  to  his  profession  and  subscription,  is  de- 
p>rived  of  his  honour  by  his  own  judgment. 


This  is  Canon  xij.  of  the  before  mentioned 
Synod  of  387  or  390. 

Johnson. 
See  Can.  Ap.  1,  Nic.  1. 
He  that  was  called  a  Metropolitan  in  other 
Churches  was  a  Primate  in  Africa. 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


449 


CANON  XIV. 

That  one  of  the  bishops  of  Tripoli  should  come  as  legate,  and  that  a  presbyter  might  be 
lueard  tliere  by  five  bishops. 

It  also  seemed  good  that  one  bishop  from  Tripoli,  on  account  of  the  poverty  of  the 
province,  should  come  as  a  legation,  and  that  there  a  presbyter  might  be  heard  by  five 
bishops,  and  a  deacon  by  three,  as  has  been  noted  above,  his  own  bishop  presiding. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XIV.  I  a.  d.  393,  and  was  repeated  at  the  Cartha- 

.,„,.,         .     _,  .       ainian  synod  of  397.    The  second  half  is  from 
On  account  of  the  scarcity  of  bishops  in  Trip-  Canon  ^   of  fche  game  counciL 

oh,  one  bishop  shall  suffice  jor  a  legation. 

Johnson  (See  Canon  12). 

This  canon  is  made  up  of  two  parts.     The       "  Legate,"  i.  c,  to  a  Synod,  there  being  few 

first  part  is  Canon  v.  of  the  synod  of  Hippo,   bishops  in  that  province. 


CANON  XV. 

Of  the  divers  orders  who  serve  the  Church,  that  if  any  one  fall  into  a  criminal  business 
and  refused  to  be  tried  by  the  ecclesiastical  court,  he  ought  to  be  in  danger  therefor  ;  and 
that  the  sons  of  bishops  (sacerdotum)  are  not  to  attend  worldly  shoivs. 

Moreover  it  seemed  good  that  if  any  bishop,  presbyter,  or  deacon,  who  had  a  crimi- 
nal charge  brought  against  him  or  who  had  a  civil  cause,  refused  to  be  tried  by  the 
ecclesiastical  tribunal,  but  wished  to  be  judged  by  the  secular  courts,  even  if  he  won  his 
suit,  nevertheless  he  should  lose  his  office. 

This  is  the  law  in  a  criminal  suit ;  but  in  a  civil  suit  he  shall  lose  that  for  the  recov- 
ery of  which  he  instituted  the  proceedings,  if  he  wishes  to  retain  his  office. 

This  also  seemed  good,  that  if  from  some  ecclesiastical  judges  an  appeal  was  taken 
to  other  ecclesiastical  judges  who  had  a  superior  jurisdiction,  this  should  in  no  way 
injure  the  reputation  of  those  from  whom  the  appeal  was  taken,  unless  it  could  be  shown 
that  they  had  given  sentence  moved  by  hatred  or  some  other  mental  bias,  or  that  they 
had  been  in  some  way  corrupted.  But  if  by  the  consent  of  both  parties  judges  had 
been  chosen,  even  if  they  were  fewer  in  number  than  is  specified,  no  appeal  can  be 
taken. 

And  [it  seemed  good]  that  the  sons  of  bishops  should  not  take  part  in  nor  witness 
secular  spectacles.  For  this  has  always  been  forbidden  to  all  Christians,  so  let  them 
abstain  from  them,  that  they  may  not  go  where  cursing  and  blasphemy  are  to  be  found. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XV. 


A  bishop  or  cleric  who  has  a  criminal  suit 
brought  against  him,  if  he  leaves  the  Church  and 
betakes  himself  to  secular  judges,  even  if  he  had 
been  unjustly  used,  shall  lose  his  rank.  And  if 
he  was  successful  in  his  political  affairs,  if  he 
follows  this,  he  shall  lose  his  own  grade.  No 
appeal  can  be  taken  from  the  ecclesiastical  judges, 
except  they  be  proved  to  have  given  their  decision 
beforehand  moved  thereto  by  a  bribe  or  by  hatred. 


No  appeal  can  be  taken  from  the  decision  of 
judges  chosen  by  each  side. 

This  canon  is  made  up  of  Canons  ix.,  x.,  and 
xj.  of  the  Council  of  Hippo,  a.  d.  393. 

Johnson. 
In  this  canon  the  African  bishops  made  bold 
•with  the  Civil  Courts.     To  lay  such  restraints 
on  bishops  and  clergymen  is,  I  am  sure,  very 
proper,  to  say  no  more. 


VOL.    XIV, 


eg 


450  AFRICAN  CODE.    A.D.  419 

CANON  XVI. 

That  no  bishop,  presbyter  or  deacon  should  be  a  "  conductor  ;  "  and  that  Headers  should 
lake  wives  ;  and  that  the  clergy  should  abstain  from  usury  ;  and  cd  what  age  they  or  vir- 
gins should  be  consecrated. 

Likewise  it  seemed  good  that  bishops,  presbyters,  and  deacons  should  not  be  "  con- 
ductors "  or  "procurators;"  nor  seek  their  food  by  any  base  and  vile  business,  for 
they  should  remember  how  it  is  written,  "  No  man  fighting  for  God  cumbereth  himself 
with  worldly  affairs." 

Also  it  seemed  good  that  Readers  when  they  come  to  years  of  puberty,  should  be 
compelled  either  to  take  Avives  or  else  to  profess  continence. 

Likewise  it  seemed  good  that  if  a  clergyman  had  lent  money  he  should  get  it  back 
again,  but  if  kind  (speciem)  he  should  receive  back  the  same  kind  as  he  gave. 

And  that  younger  than  twenty-five  years  deacons  should  not  be  ordained,  nor  virgins 
consecrated. 

And  that  readers  should  not  salute  the  people. 


NOTES 

Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XVI. 

A  bishop,  presbyter,  and  deacon  may  not  be  a 
"  conductor  "  or  a  "procurator."  A  reader  when 
he  comes  to  puberty  must  contract  marriage  or 
profess  continence. 

A  cleric  who  has  lent  to  someone,  what  he 
gave  let  him  receive,  or  as  much. 

Let  not  him  be  a  deacon,  who  is  made  a  dea- 
con being  under  twenty-five. 

And  let  not  readers  salute  the  people. 


This  canon  is  made  up  of  Canons  xv.,  xviij., 
and  xxj.,  and  added  to  these  Canon  j.  of  the 
same  Second  Series  of  the  synod  of  Hippo, 
a.d.  393. 

Johnson. 

Zonaras  says  this  was  never  observed  any- 
where but  in  Africa.     See  Can.  Afr.  19  (27). 

Du  Pin  turns  the  Latin,  saluto,  by  "  ad- 
dressing his  speech  to  the  people." 


CANON  XVII. 

TJmt  any  province  on  account  of  its  distance,  may  have  its  own  Primate. 

It  seemed  good  that  Mauretania  Sitiphensis,  as  it  asked,  should  have  a  Primate  of 
its  own,  with  the  consent  of  the  Primate  of  Numidia  from  whose  synod  it  had  been  sep- 
arated.1 And  with  the  consent  of  all  the  primates  of  the  African  Provinces  and  of  all 
the  bishops  permission  was  given,  by  reason  of  the  great  distance  between  them. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XVII. 
Mauretania  Sitiphensis,  on  account  of  the  great 
distance,  is  permitted  to  have  its  own  Primate. 

This  canon  is  Canon   iij.  of  the  first  series 
of  canons  enacted  at  Hippo  in  393. 


Johnson. 


N.B.  From  this  place  forward  the  Latin 
and  Greek  numeration  varies  ;  but  Justellus's 
Edition  in  Greek  and  Litin  follows  the  Latin 
division. 


CANON  XVIII.     (Gk.  xviii.     The  Latin  caption  is  the  canon  of  the  Greek.) 

If  any  cleric  is  ordained  he  ought  to  be  admonished  to  observe  the  constitidions. 
And  that  neither  the  Eucharist  nor  Bajytism  should  be  given  to  the  bodies  of  the  dead. 
And  that  every  year  in  every  province  the  Metropolitans  come  together  in  synod. 

(Gk.  Canon  xix.) 
It  seemed  good  that  before  bishops,  or  clerics  were  ordained,  the  provisions  of  the 
canons  should  be  brought  to  their  notice,  lest  they  might  afterwards  repent  of  having 
through  ignorance  acted  contrary  to  law. 

i  The  test  here  is  corrupt. 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419  451 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Greek  Canon  XIX. 
Tlxe  things  which  have  been  adopted  by  the 


synods  should  be  made  knoivn  to  him  who  is  to 
be  ordained. 


(Gk.  Canon  xx.) 

It  also  seemed  good  that  the  Eucharist  should  not  be  given  to  the  bodies  of  the 
dead.  For  it  is  written  :  "  Take,  Eat,"  but  the  bodies  of  the  dead  can  neither  "  take  " 
nor  "eat."    Nor  let  the  ignorance  of  the  presbyters  baptize  those  who  are  dead. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Greek  Canon  XX. 


The  Eucharist  is  not  to  be  given  to  the  body 
of  one  dead  for  it  neither  eats  nor  drinks. 


The  ignorance  of  a  presbyter  shall  not  bap- 
tise a  dead  man. 


(Gk.  Canon  xxi.) 

And  therefore  in  this  holy  synod  should  be  confirmed  in  accordance  with  the  Ni- 
cene  decrees,  on  account  of  Ecclesiastical  causes,  which  often  are  delayed  to  the  injury 
of  the  people,  that  every  year  there  should  be  a  synod,  to  which  all,  who  are  primates  of 
the  provinces,  should  send  bishops  as  legates,  from  their  own  synods,  two  or  as  many  as 
they  choose ;  so  that  when  the  synod  meets  it  may  have  full  power  to  act. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Greek  Canon  XXI.      [  Eucharist  or  Baptism  be  not  given  to  dead 

According  to  the  decrees  of  the  Nicene  Fathers   corpses  ;  and  that  the  Metropolitans  in  every 

a  yearly  synod  shall  be  assembled,  and  two  legates   province  meet  in  synod  yearly.]     They  speak 

or  as  many  as  they  shall  choose,  shall  be  sent  by  ;  tneir  ovm  language,  and  call  him  a  Metro- 


the  primates  of  every  province. 

This  is  composed  of  Canons  II.,  IV.,  and 
V.  of  the  second  series  of  enactments  of 
Hippo,  a.d.  393. 

Johnson. 

The  18th  canon  in  the  Edition  of  Tilius 


politan,  whom  the  Africans  called  a  Primate ; 
but  then  they  have  also  the  entire  18th 
canon,  as  it  here  stands  according  to  the 
Latin,  which  they  divide  into  three,  and  num- 
ber them  19,  20,  21. 

See  Can.  Nic.  5.  It  seems  very  odd  that 
they  should  allege  the  authority  of  the 
Nicene  Synod  upon  this  occasion  ;  for  that 


and  Bishop  Beveridge  runs  thus  ;  viz.  [If  any  |  orders  a  synod  twice  a  year,  this  but  once  ; 
clergyman  be  ordained  he  ought  to  be  re- ,  that  intends  a  provincial  synod,  this  a  dioc- 
minded   to  keep  the  canons  ;   and  that  the   esan  or  national  one. 


CANON   XIX.     (Greek  xxii.)  * 

TJiat  if  any  bishop  is  accused  the  cause  should  be  brought  before  the  primate  of  his  oivn 
province. 

Aurelius,  the  bishop,  said :  Whatever  bishop  is  accused  the  accuser  shall  bring 
the  case  before  the  primates  of  the  province  to  which  the  accused  belongs,  and  he 
shall  not  be  suspended  from  communion  by  reason  of  the  crime  laid  to  his  charge 
unless  he  fails  to  put  in  an  appearance  on  the  appointed  day  for  arguing  his  cause 
before  the  chosen  judges,  having  been  duly  summoned  by  the  letters  ;  that  is,  within 
the  space  of  one  month  from  the  day  in  which  he  is  found  to  have  received  the  letters. 
But  should  he  be  able  to  prove  any  true  necessit}r  which  manifestly  rendered  it  impos- 
sible for  him  to  appear,  he  shall  have  the  opportunity  of  arguing  his  case  within 

1  For  Greek  xx.  aud  xxi.  see  Latin  Canon  XVffl. 
Gg  2 


452 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


another  full  month ;  but  after  the  second  month  he  shall  not  communicate  until  he  is 
acquitted. 

But  if  he  is  not  willing  to  come  to  the  annual  general  council,  so  that  his  cause 
may  there  be  terminated,  he  himself  shall  be  judged  to  have  pronounced  the  sentence 
of  his  own  condemnation  at  the  time  in  which  he  does  not  communicate,  nor  shall  he 
communicate  either  in  his  own  church  or  diocese. 

But  his  accuser,  if  he  has  not  missed  any  of  the  days  for  pleading  the  cause,  shall 
not  be  shut  out  from  communion ;  but  if  he  has  missed  some  of  them,  withdrawing 
himself,  then  the  bishop  shall  be  restored  to  communion  and  the  accuser  shall  be 
removed  from  communion ;  so,  nevertheless,  that  the  possibility  of  going  on  with  the 
case  be  not  taken  from  him,  if  he  shall  prove  that  his  absence  was  caused  by  lack  of 
power  and  not  by  lack  of  will. 

And  this  is  enacted,  that  if  the  accuser  turn  out  to  be  himself  a  criminal  when  the 
case  against  the  bishop  has  come  to  argument,  he  shall  not  be  allowed  to  testify  unless 
he  asserts  that  the  causes  are  personal  and  not  ecclesiastical. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XIX. 
A  bishop  accused  and  haled  to  judgment  shall 
have  the  space  of two  months ;  if  there  is  any  ex- 
cuse 1  for  his  delay  from  the  oilier  side.  But 
after  this  he  shall  be  excommunicated  if  he  docs 
not  appear.  But  if  when  the  accused  is  present 
the  accuser  flees,  then  the  accuser  shall  be  de- 
prived of  communion.  But  the  accuser  xoho  is 
infamous  shall  not  be  an  accuser  at  all. 


This  canon  is  made  up  from  Canons  VI. 
and  VII.  of  the  last  mentioned  second  series 
of  the  enactments  of  Hippo,  393. 

Johnson. 
See  Can.  Afr.  28  and  Can.  Ap.  11  (14). 
By   this   ["Universal  Synod"]  is  meant  a 
National  Synod  of  Africa. 
See  Can.  Constantinople  6. 


CANON  XX.    (Greek  xxiii.) 
Of  accused  presbyters  or  clerks. 

But  if  presbyters  or  deacons  shall  have  been  accused,  there  shall  be  joined  to- 
gether from  the  neighbouring  places  with  the  bishop  of  the  diocese,  the  legitimate  num- 
ber of  colleagues,  whom  the  accused  shall  seek  from  the  same ;  that  is  together  with 
himself  six  in  the  case  against  a  presbyter,  in  that  against  a  deacon  three.  They  shall 
discuss  the  causes,  and  the  same  form  shall  be  kept  with  regard  to  daj-s  and  postpone- 
ments and  removals  from  communion,  and  in  the  discussion  of  persons  between  the 
accusers  and  the  accused. 

But  the  causes  of  the  rest  of  the  clergy,  the  bishop  of  the  place  shall  take  cogni- 
zance of  and  determine  alone. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XX. 
Wlien  a  presbyter  is  accused,  six  of  the  neigh- 
bouring bishops  together  with  the  bishop  of  that 
region  shall  judge  the  matter.  But  for  a  deacon, 
three.  What  things  concern  the  other  clerics 
even  one  bishop  shall  examine. 


This  is  Canon  viij.  of  Hippo,  393. 

Johnson. 
See  Canon  12. 


CANON  XXI.     (Greek  xxiv.) 

That  the  sons  of  clergymen  are  not  to  be  joined  in  marriage  with  heretics. 

Likewise  it  seemed  good  that  the  sons  of  clergymen  should  not  be  joined  in  matri- 
mony with  gentiles  and  heretics. 


1  It  would  seem  that  this  must  be  the  meaning. 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


453 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXI. 
[The  same  as  the  canon.] 


NOTES. 

j     This  is  Canon  xij.  of  Hippo,  393. 


CANON  XXII.   (Greek  xxv.) 

That  bishops  or  other  clergymen  shall  give  nothing  to  those  who  are  not  Catholics. 

And  that  to  those  who  are  not  Catholic  Christians,  even  if  they  be  blood  relations, 
neither  bishops  nor  clergymen  shall  give  anything  at  all  by  way  of  donation  of  their 
possessions. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXII. 
Bishops  and  clergymen  shall  give  nothing  of 
their  goods  to  heretics,  nor  confer  aught  upon 
them  even  if  they  be  their  relatives. 


This  is  Canon  xiv.  of  Hippo,  393. 


CANON  XXIII.  (Greek  xxvi.) 

That  bishops  shall  not  go  across  seas. 

Item,  That  bishops  shall  not  go  beyond  seas  without  consulting  the  bishop  of  the 
primatial  see  of  his  own  province :  so  that  from  him  they  may  be  able  to  receive  a 
formed  or  commendatory  letter. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXIII. 

A  bishop  is  not  to  cross  the  seas  unless  he  has 
received  from  the  Primate  of  his  region  a  letter 
dimissory. 

This  is  Canon  xxvij.  of  Hippo,  393. 

Johnson. 

See  note  on  Canons  of  the  Apostles,  10 
(13).  [viz:] 


[The  use  of  Letters  Commendatory  was 
very  early  in  the  Church  ;  St.  Paul  mentions 
them  II.  Cor.  iij.  1.  And  it  is  not  easy  to  be 
conceived  how  discipline  can  be  restored  but 
by  the  reviving  of  this  practice.  It  is  surely 
irregular  to  admit  all  chance  comers  to  the 
Communion,  who,  for  aught  we  know,  may 
stand  excommunicated  by  their  own  bishop. 
Of  the  difference  between  Commendatory  and 
Pacific  and  Formal  Letters,  see  Can.  Chalc, 
11 ;  Apost.,  25,  26 ;  Ant.,  6  ;  Sardic,  13]. 


CANON  XXIV.    (Greek  xxvii.) 

That  noticing  be  read  in  church  besides  the  Canonical  Scripture. 

Item,  that  besides  the  Canonical  Scriptures  nothing  be  read  in  church  under  the 
name  of  divine  Scripture. 

But  the  Canonical  Scriptures  are  as  follows : 

Genesis. 

Exodus. 

Leviticus. 

Numbers. 

Deuteronomy. 

Joshua  the  Son  of  Nun. 

The  Judges. 

Ruth. 

The  Kings,  iv.  books. 


454  AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  410 


The  Chronicles,  ij.  books. 

Job. 

The  Psalter. 

The  Five  books  of  Solomon. 

The  Twelve  Books  of  the  Prophets. 

Isaiah. 

Jeremiah. 

Ezechiel. 

Daniel. 

Tobit. 

Judith. 

Esther. 

Ezra,  ij.  books. 

Macchabees,  ij.  books. 

The  New  Testament. 
The  Gospels,  iv.  books. 
The  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  j.  book. 
The  Epistles  of  Paul,  xiv. 
The  Epistles  of  Peter,  the  Apostle,  ij. 
The  Epistles  of  John  the  Apostle,  iij. 
The  Epistles  of  James  the  Apostle,  j. 
The  Epistle  of  Jude  the  Apostle,  j. 
The  Revelation  of  John,  j.  book. 

Let  this  be  sent  to  our  brother  and  fellow  bishop,  Boniface,  and  to  the  other  bishops 
of  those  parts,  that  they  may  confirm  this  canon,  for  these  are  the  things  which  we 
have  received  from  our  fathers  to  be  read  in  church. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXIV. 


Let  nothing  besides  the  canonical  Scriptures 
be  read  in  church. 

This  is  Canon  xxxvj.  of  Hippo.,  393.  The 
last  phrase  allowing  the  reading  of  the  "  pas- 
sions of  the  Martyrs  "  on  their  Anniversaries 
is  omitted  from  the  African  code. 


Johnson. 


These  two  books  [i.e.  the  two  Maccabees] 
are  mentioned  only  in  Dionysius  Exiguus's 
copy.     See  Can.  Ap.  idt.,  Can.  Laod.  tilt. 

"Boniface,"  i.e.,  Bishop  of  Rome. 


CANON    XXV.    (Greek  xxviii.) 

Concerning  bishops  and  the  lower  orders  who  wait  upon  the  most  holy  mysteries.  It 
lias  seemed  good  that  these  abstain  from  their  toives. 

Aueelius,  the  bishop,  said :  We  add,  most  dear  brethren,  moreover,  since  we  have 
heard  of  the  incontinency  of  certain  clerics,  even  of  readers,  towards  their  wives,  it 
seemed  good  that  what  had  been  enacted  in  divers  councils  should  be  confirmed,  to  wit, 
that  subdeacons  who  Avait  upon  the  holy  mysteries,  and  deacons,  and  presbyters,  as 
well  as  bishops  according  to  former  statutes,1  should  contain  from  their  wives,  so  that 
they  should  be  as  though  they  had  them  not :  and  unless  they  so  act,  let  them  be  re- 
moved from  office.  But  the  rest  of  the  clergy  are  not  to  be  compelled  to  this,  unless 
they  be  of  mature  age.  And  by  the  whole  council  it  was  said  :  What  your  holiness  has 
said  is  just,  holy,  and  pleasing  to  God,  and  we  confirm  it. 

1  The  Greek  reads  "  koto  tous  ioi'ou?  opovs,"  and  so  it  was  understood  at  the  Council  of  Trullo,  as  is  evident  from  Canon  XIII.  ol 
that  synod.    The  Latin  is  ■■  secundum  propria  Btatnta,"  but  Bruns  reads  "  priora." 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


455 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  NXV. 
Those  who  handle  holy  things  should  abstain 
even  from  their  own  wives  at  the  times  of  their 
ministration. 

This  is  founded  upon  Canon  iv.  of  the 
Council  of  Carthage,  which  met  September 
13th,  401,  but  the  provisions  are  more  strin- 
gent here,  subdeacons  as  well  as  deacons 
being  constrained  to  continence. 

Johnson. 
"  Times  of  ministration,"  so  it  is  explained, 


Can.  Trull.,  13,  where  there  were  several  Afri- 
can Bishops  present,  and  allowed  of  that  ex- 
plication ;  yet  Dion.  Exig.  is  not  clear,  viz., 
Secundum  propria  statuta. 

By  Can.  Laod.,  23.  Ministers,  i.e.,  sub- 
deacons,  are  forbid  to  touch  the  Holy  Vessels, 
yet  here  they  are  said  to  handle  the  Mys- 
teries ;  I  suppose  they  might  handle  the 
Holy  Vessels,  etc.  before  and  after  the  cele- 
bration, but  not  during  the  solemnity  ;  or 
else  the  customs  of  several  ages  and  countries 
differed  as  to  this  particular. 


CANON   XXVI.     (Greek  xxix.) 

That  no  one  should  take  from  the  possessions  of  the  Church.* 

Likewise  it  seemed  good  that  no  one  should  sell  anything  belonging  to  the  Church : 
that  if  there  was  no  revenue,  and  other  great  necessity  urged  thereto,  this  might  be 
brought  before  the  Metropolitan  of  the  province  that  he  might  deliberate  with  the  ap- 
pointed number  of  bishops  whether  this  should  be  done  :  that  if  such  urgent  necessity 
lay  upon  any  church  that  it  could  not  take  counsel  beforehand,  at  least  let  it  call  to- 
gether the  neighbouring  bishops  as  witnesses,  taking  care  to  refer  all  the  necessities  of 
Ms  church  to  the  council  :  and  that  if  he  shall  not  do  this,  he  shall  be  held  as  respon- 
sible toward  God,  and  as  a  seller  in  the  eye  of  the  council,  and  he  shall  have  lost  thereby 
his  honour. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXVI. 

Church  goods  must  not  be  sold.  If  they 
bring  in  no  revenue  they  may  be  sold  at  the  will 
of  the  bishops.  If  the  necessity  does  not  alloiv 
that  consultation  should  take  place,  lie  who  sells 
shall  call  together  the  neighbouring  bisho2)s.     If 


he  does  not  do  so  he  shall  be  held  responsible  to 
God  and  to  the  Synod. 

This  is  Canon  v.  of  the  S}rnod  of  Carthage, 
Sept.  13th,  401. 

Johnson. 

"Appointed   number,"    i.e.,    Twelve,    see 
i  Canon  12. 


CANON  XXVII.    (Greek  xxx.) 

Presbyters  and  deacons  convicted  of  the  graver  crimes  si hall  not  receive  laying  on  of 
hands,  like  laymen.2 

It  also  was  confirmed  that  if  presbyters  or  deacons  were  convicted  of  any  of  the 
greater  crimes  on  account  of  which  it  was  necessary  that  they  should  be  removed  from 
the  ministry,  that  hands  should  not  be  laid  upon  them  as  upon  penitents,  or  as  upon 
faithful  laymen,  nor  should  it  be  permitted  that  they  be  baptized  over  again  and  then 
advanced  to  the  clerical  grade. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXVII. 
A  presbyter  convicted  and  repenting,  is  not  to 
be  rebaptized   as  one  to  be  advanced,  neither  as 
a  layman  is  he  to  be  reordained. 

This  is  Canon  xij.  of  the  before-mentioned 
Council  of  Carthage,  Sept.  13th,  401. 


Johnson. 
This  canon  seems  to  have  been  designed 
to  preclude  deposed  clergymen  from  all  pos- 
sibility of  being  restored,  directly  or  indi- 
rectly. 


1  Not  found  in  the  Greek  of  Beveridge,  but  in  that  given  by  Labbe. 


2  This  found  only  in  Latin. 


456 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


CANON  XXVIII.    (Greek  xxxi.) 

Presbyters,  deacons,  or  clerics,  ivho  shall  think  good  to  carry  appeals  in  their  causes 
across  the  water  shall  not  at  all  be  admitted  to  communion.1 

It  also  seemed  good  that  presbyters,  deacons,  and  others  of  the  inferior  clergy  in  the 
causes  which  they  had,  if  they  were  dissatisfied  with  the  judgments  of  their  bishops,  let 
the  neighbouring  bishops  with  the  consent  of  their  own  bishop  hear  them,  and  let  the 
bishops  who  have  been  called  in  judge  between  them  :  but  if  they  think  they  have  cause 
of  appeal  from  these,  they  shall  not  betake  themselves  to  judgments  from  beyond  seas, 
but  to  the  primates  of  their  own  provinces,  or  else  to  an  universal  council,  as  has  also 
been  decreed  concerning  bishops.  But  whoso  shall  think  good  to  carry  an  appeal  across 
the  water  shall  be  received  to  communion  by  no  one  within  the  boundaries  of  Africa. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXVIII. 
Clerics  icho  have  been  condemned,  if  they  take 
exception  to  the  judgment,  shall  not  appeal  be- 
yond seas,  but  to  the  neighbouring  bishops,  and 
to  their  own;  if  they  do  otherwise  let  them  be 
excommunicated  in  Africa. 

This  canon  is  the  same  as  Canon  xvij.  of  the 
Synod  of  Carthage  of  418,  but  it  has  some 
words  with  regard  to  appeals  which  that  canon 
does  not  contain,  viz.:  " Aut  ad  universale  con- 
cilium, sicut  ctde  episcopis  scepe  constitution  est." 
This  clause,  affirming  that  bishops  have  often 
been  forbidden  to  appeal  across  the  water  from 
the  decisions  of  the  African  bishops,  has  caused 
great  perplexity  as  no  such  decrees  are  extant. 
The  Ballerini,  to  avoid  this  difficulty,  and 
possibly  for  other  reasons,  suggest  an  entirely 


different  meaning  to  the  passage,  and  suppose 
that  it  means  that  "bishops  have  often  been 
allowed  to  appeal  to  the  Universal  Council 
and  now  this  privilege  is  extended  to  priests." 2 
But  this  would  seem  to  be  a  rather  unnatural 
interpretation  and  Van  Espen  in  his  Commen- 
tary shews  good  reason  for  adopting  the  more 
evident  view. 

Johnson. 

See  Can.  Afr.,  19. 

Clearly  the  See  of  Rome  is  here  aimed  at, 
as  if  Carthage  were  the  place  designed  by 
Providence  to  put  a  stop  to  the  growth  of 
power  in  Christian  Rome,  as  well  as  heathen. 
It  is  strange,  that  this  canon  should  be  re- 
ceived by  the  Church  of  Rome  in  former 
ages. 


CANON  XXIX.    (Greek  xxxii.) 

If  anyone  ivho  is  excommunicated  shall  receive  communion  before  his  cause  is  heard  he 
brings  damnation  on  himself.3 

Likewise  it  pleased  the  whole  Council  that  he  who  shall  have  been  excommunicated 
for  any  neglect,  whether  he  be  bishop,  or  any  other  cleric,  and  shall  have  presumed 
while  still  under  sentence,  and  his  cause  not  yet  heard,  to  receive  communion,  he  shall 
be  considered  by  so  doing  to  have  given  sentence  against  himself. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXIX. 


One  excommunicate  ivho  shall  communicate 
before  absolution  sentences  himself. 


This   canon   seems 
Canon  iv.  of  Antioch. 


to    be  founded   upon 


Johnson. 

See  Can.  Ap.,  21  (29),  Antioch,  4. 

By  this  canon  the  criminous  bishop  is  sup- 
posed to  be  excommunicated  before  he  comes 
to  have  his  cause  heard  by  a  Synod,  or  by  12 
neighbouring  bishops  :  and  it  is  therefore  most 
rational  to  believe  that  he  was  thus  censured 
by  his  Primate.     See  Can.  Afr.,  12. 


1  This  is  not  found  in  the  Greek  of  Beveridge. 
s  Ballerini,  edit.  S.  Leon  M.,  Tom.  II.,  p.  966. 


3  Not  found  in  the  Greek  of  Beveridge. 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


457 


CANON   XXX.    (Greek  xxxiii.) 

Concerning  the  accused  or  accuser.1 

Likewise  it  seemed  good  that  the  accused,  or  the  accusor,  if  (living  in  the  same  place 
as  the  accused)  he  fears  some  evil  may  be  done  him  by  the  tumultuous  multitude,  may 
choose  for  himself  a  place  near  by,  where  the  caixse  may  be  determined,  and  where 
there  will  be  no  difficulty  in  producing  the  witnesses. 

Ancient  Epitome  or  Canon  XXX. 
Accuser  or  accused  may  select  for  himself  a  safe  place  if  he  fears  violence. 

CANON  XXXI.  (Greek  xxxiv.) 

If  certain  clerics  advanced  by  their  own  bishops  arc  supercilious,  let  them  not  remain 
whence  they  are  unwilling  to  come  forth. 

It  also  seemed  good  that  whoever  of  the  clergy  or  of  the  deacons  would  not  help 
the  bishop  in  the  necessities  of  the  churches,  when  he  wished  to  lift  them  to  a  higher 
position  in  his  diocese,  should  no  longer  be  allowed  to  exercise  the  functions  of  that 
grade  from  which  they  were  not  willing  to  be  removed. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXXI.  I  in  some  Churches,  were  provided  of  a  better 

Who  despises  a  greater  honour  shall  lose  what  maintenance  than  priests  ;  or  it  maybe  un- 

he  hath.  derstood  of  inferior  clergymen,  who  were  per- 

Johnson  mitted  to  marry  in  the  degree  they  were  now 

It  is  most  probable  that' this  canon  is  to  be  | in'.  but  would  not.  willingly  take  the  order  of 

understood  of  deacons  designed  by  the  bishop  ]  fr}ef  _or  deac0D>  because  then  the?  were  Pro" 

to  be  ordained  priests,  for  the  deacons,  at  least  I lllbltecl  marriage. 


CANON  XXXII.  (Greek  xxxv.) 

If  any  poor  cleric,  no  matter  what  his  rank  may  be,  shall  acquire  any  property,  it  shcdl 
be  subject  to  the  power  of  the  bishop.2 

It  also  seemed  good  that  bishops,  presbyters,  deacons  and  any  other  of  the  clergy, 
who  when  they  were  ordained  had  no  possessions,  and  in  the  time  of  their  episcopate  or 
after  they  became  clerics,  shall  purchase  in  their  own  names  lands  or  any  other  property, 
shall  be  held  guilty  of  the  crime  of  intrenching  upon  the  Lord's  goods,  unless,  when  they 
are  admonished  to  do  so,  they  place  the  same  at  the  disposal  of  the  Church.  But  should 
anything  come  to  them  personally  by  the  liberality  of  anyone,  or  by  succession  from 
some  relative,  let  them  do  what  they  will  with  it ;  if,  however,  they  demand  it  back 
again,  contrary  to  what  they  proposed,  they  shall  be  judged  unworthy  of  ecclesiastical 
honour  as  back-sliders. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XXXII. 
Whoso  after  his  ordination  although  he  has 
nothing   yet  buys  a  field,  shall  give  it  to  the 
Church,  unless  he  got  it  by  succession  from  a 
relation  or  by  pure  liberality. 

In  this  canon  there  is  difficulty  about  the 
meaning  of  the  phrase  "quod  eorum  proposito 
congruat."    Hardouin  suggests  that  "  propo- 


situm  "  is  the  same  as  "profession,"  or  "call- 
ing," and  the  meaning,  were  this  the  case, 
would  be  that  he  must  employ  it  as  befits  his 
clerical  calling.  Van  Espen  follows  Balsamon 
and  Zonaras  in  understanding  it  to  mean  that 
if  he  has  proposed  to  employ  a  part  for  the 
Church  or  for  the  poor,  and  changes  his  mind, 
he  is  to  be  deposed  ;  and  this  meaning  I  have 
followed. 


1  Found  only  in  Latin. 


2  "  Of  the  Church"  in  Dion.  Esig. 


458 


AFRICAN  CODE.     A.D.  419 


CANON  XXXIII.  (Greek  xxxvi.) 

That  presbyters  should  not  sell  the  goods  of  the  Church  in  xohich  they  are  constituted; 
and  that  no  bishop  can  rigidly  use  anything  the  title  to  which  vests  in  the  ecclesiastical  ma- 
terncd  centre  (/iaTpt/co?). 

It  also  seemed  good  that  presbyters  should  not  sell  the  ecclesiastical  property  where 
they  are  settled  without  their  bishop's  knowledge ;  and  it  is  not  lawful  for  bishops  to  sell 
the  goods  of  the  Church  without  the  council  or  their  presbyters  being  aware  of  it.  Nor 
should  the  bishop  without  necessity  usurp  the  property  of  the  maternal  (matricis)  Church 
[nor  should  a  presbyter  usurp  the  property  of  his  own  cure  (titulij].1 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXXIII. 
A  presbyter  is  not  to  sell  ecclesiastical  prop- 
erty without  the  consent  of  the  bishop.    A  bishop 
is  not  to  sell  without  the  approbation  of  his  synod 
a  country  property. 

Fuchs  (Biblioth.  der  Kirchenvcrs.,  vol.  iij.,  p. 
5)  thinks  the  text  is  corrupt  in  the  last  sen- 
tence and  should  be  corrected  by  Canon  x.  of 
the  Council  of  Carthage  of  421,  so  as  to  read, 
"  that  which  is  left  by  will  to  a  rural  church 


in  the  diocese  must  not  be  applied  to  the 
Mother  Church  through  the  usurpation  of 
the  bishop." 

Johnson. 

"  Or  title.-'  So  I  turn  the  Lat.  Titidus  for 
want  of  a  proper  English  word.  It  denotes  a 
lesser  church  in  any  city  or  diocese,  served 
by  a  priest. 

"The  Mother  Church,"  i.e.,  The  cathedral, 
the  Church  in  which  the  bishop  resides. 


Moreover  at  this  Synod  we  read  all  the  conciliar  decrees  of  all  the  Province  of  Africa 
in  the  different  synods  held  in  the  time  of  Bishop  Aurelius.2 

Concerning  the  Synod  which  assembled  in  Ilippo  Regio. 

Under  the  most  illustrious  consuls,  the  most  glorious  Emperor  Theodosius  Augustus 
for  the  third  time,  and  Abundantius,  on  the  viij.  Ides  of  October,  at  Hippo  Regio,  in 
the  sccretarium  of  the  Church  of  Peace.  And  the  rest  of  the  acts  of  this  Synod  have 
not  been  written  down  here  because  these  constitutions  are  found  set  forth  above. 

Of  the  Council  of  Carthage  at  which  the  proconsular  bishops  were  appointed  legates 
to  the  Council  at  Adrumetum. 

In  the  consulate  of  the  most  glorious  emperors — Arcadius  for  the  third  time  and  Hon- 
orius  for  the  second  time,  Augustuses,  on  the  vith3  day  before  the  Calends  of  July,  at  Car- 
thage. In  this  council  the  proconsular  bishops  were  chosen  as  legates  to  the  Council  of 
Adrumetum. 

Of  a  Council  of  Carthage  cd  which  many  statutes  were  made. 

In  the  consulate  of  those  most  illustrious  men,  Cassarius  and  Atticus,  on  the  vth  day 
before  the  Calends  of  September  in  the  secretarium  of  the  restored  basilica,  when  Aure- 
lius the  bishop,  together  with  the  bishops,  had  taken  his  seat,  the  deacons  also  standing 
by,  and  Victor  the  old  man  of  Puppiana,  Tutus  of  Migirpa  and  Evangel  of  Assuri. 

The  Allocution  of  Aurelius  the  bishop  of  Carthage  to  the  bishops. 

Aurelius,  the  bishop,  said : 4  After  the  day  fixed  for  the  council,  as  ye  remember,  most 
blessed  brethren,  Ave  sat  and  waited  for  the  legations  of  all  the  African  provinces  to 
assemble  upon  the  day,  as  I  have  said,  set  by  our  missive  ;  but  Avhen  the  letter  of  our 


1  Only  found  in  the  Latin. 

2  These  interludes  or  "  Digression?,"  as  Van  Espeu  calls  them, 
are  found  in  Dionysius  and  in  the  Greek  texts. 


3  In  the  Greek  this  reads  xvith. 

4  The  text  here  I  suspect  is  much  corrupted.    The  Greek  and 
Latin  do  not  agree. 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


459 


Byzacene  bishops  had  been  read,  that  was  read  to  your  charity,  which  they  had  dis- 
cussed with  me  who  had  anticipated  the  time  and  day  of  the  council ;  also  it  was  read 
by  our  brethren  Honoratus  and  Urban,  who  are  to-day  present  with  us  in  this  council,  sent 
as  the  legation  of  the  Sitifensine  Province.  For  our  brother  Reginus  of  the  Vege[t]seli- 
tane *  Church,2  the  letters  sent  to  my  littleness  by  Crescentian  and  Aurelius,  our  fellow- 
bishops,  of  the  first  sees  of  the  [two]  Numidias,  in  which  writings  your  charity  will  see 
with  me  how  they  promised  that  either  they  themselves  would  be  good  enough  to  come 
or  else  that  they  would  send  legates  according  to  custom  to  this  council ;  but  this  it 
seems  they  did  not  do  at  all,  the  legates  of  Mauritania  Sitifensis,  who  had  come  so 
great  a  distance  gave  notice  that  they  could  stay  no  longer ;  and,  therefore,  brethren,  if 
it  seem  good  to  your  charity,  let  the  letters  of  our  Byzacene  brethren,  as  also  the  breviary, 
which  they  joined  to  the  same  letter,  be  read  to  this  assembly,  so  that  if  by  any  chance 
they  are  not  entirely  satisfactory  to  your  charity,  such  things  in  the  breviary  may  be 
changed  for  the  better  after  diligent  examination.  For  this  very  thing  our  brother  and 
fellow-bishop  of  the  primatial  see,  a  man  justly  conspicuous  for  his  gravity  and  prudence, 
Mizonius,  demanded  in  a  letter  he  addressed  to  my  littleness.  If  therefore  it  meets 
with  your  approval,  let  there  be  read  the  things  which  have  been  adopted  and  let  each 
by  itself  be  considered  by  your  charity. 


CANON  XXXIV.  (Greek  xxxvii.) 

That  nothing  of  those  things  enacted  in  the  Synod  of  Hippo  is  to  be  corrected. 

Bishop  Epigonius  said :  In  this  summary  (Breviarium)  which  was  adopted  at  the 
Synod  of  Hippo,  we  think  nothing  should  be  amended,  nor  anything  added  thereto 
except  that  the  day  on  which  the  holy  Feast  of  Easter  falls  should  be  announced  in 
Synod. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXXIV. 
Nothing  is  to  he  corrected  in  the  synod  of 
Hippo,  nor  anything  added  thereto,  except  that 
the  time  of  celebrating   Easter  should   be   an- 
nounced in  time  of  synod. 

The  first  of  these  introductions  is  that  of 
the  Synod  of  Hippo  in  a.d.  393  ;  the  next  that 


of  Carthage  in  a.d.  394,  and  the  third  that  of 
the  same  place,  held  August  28th,  a.d.  397. 

This  canon  (number  xxxiv.  of  the  code)  is 
the  beginning  of  Canon  v.  of  the  last  named 
Synod. 

Johnson. 

See  Canons  51  and  73. 


CANON  XXXV.  (Greek  xxxviii.) 

That  bishops  or  clergymen  should  not  easily  set  free  their  sons. 

That  bishops  or  clerics  should  not  easily  let  their  children  pass  out  of  their  power ; 
unless  they  were  secure  of  their  morals  and  age,  that  their  own  sins  may  pertain  to 
them. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXXV. 
Bishops  and  clergy  shall  not  set  their  children 
free  until  their  morals  are  established. 


This  canon  is  Canon  xiij.  of  the  Synod  of 
Hippo,  a.d.  393. 


■  'In  Gustavus  Willmann's  Corpus  Inscriptionum  Latinarum,  \  having  the  same  name  and  not  far  one  from  the  other.     Cf.  map 
Vol.  vm.,  p.  47,  the  reading  is  given  as  rer/eselitance,  in  one  word.  .  20,  Spruner-Sieglin,  Atlas  Antiguus. 

The  town  was  Vegesela,  and  unfortunately  there  were  two  towns  |      2  The  verb  is  lacking.  The  EdL  of  Migne's  Dion.  Exig.  suggests 

legit. 


460 


AFKlCAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


CANON  XXXVI.  (Greek  xxxix.) 

That  bishops  or  clergymen  are  not  to  be  ordained  unless  they  have  made  all  their  family 
Christians. 

None  shall  be  ordained  bishop,  presbyters,  or  deacons  before  all  the  inmates  of 
their  houses  shall  have  become  Catholic  Christians. 


NOTES 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXXVI. 
He  shall  not  be  ordained  who  hath  not  made 
all  his  household  orthodox. 


This  canon  is  Canon  xvij.  of  the  Synod  of 
Hippo,  a.d.  393. 


CANON  XXXVII.  (Greek  xl.) 

It  is  not  lawful  to  offer  anything  in  the  Holy  Mysteries  except  bread  and  ivine  mixed 
with  tvater. 

In  the  sacraments  of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord  nothing  else  shall  be  offered 
than  that  which  the  Lord  himself  ordained,  that  is  to  say,  bread  and  wine  mixed  with 
water.  But  let  the  first-fruits,  whether  honey  or  milk,  be  offered  on  that  one  most  sol- 
emn day,  as  is  wont,  in  the  mystery  of  the  infants.  For  although  they  are  offered  on 
the  altar,  let  them  have  nevertheless  their  own  benediction,  that  they  may  be  distin- 
guished from  the  sacraments  of  the  Lord's  body  and  blood ;  neither  let  there  be  offered 
as  first-fruits  anything  other  than  grapes  and  corns. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XXXVII. 
Let  bread  and  wine  mixed  with  water  only  be 
offered. 

The  text  of  the  Greek  here  does  not  ex- 
actly agree  with  the  Latin.  The  Greek  reads 
as  follows:  "That  in  the  Holy  Mysteries 
nothing  else  be  offered  than  the  body  and 
blood  of  the  Lord,  even  as  the  Lord  himself 
delivered,  that  is  bread  and  wine  mixed  with 
water." 

Further  down  with  regard  to  the  first-fruits 
I  have  followed  the  Greek  text  which  seems 
decidedly  preferable,  in  fact  the  Latin  is  so 


corrupt  that  Van  Espen  notes  that  for  the 
ordinary  "  offerantur "  some  MSS.  read  "non 
offerantur." 

This  canon  is  Canon  xxiij.  of  the  Synod  of 
Hippo,  a.d.  393. 

Johnson. 

See  Can.  Ap.  2  (3). 

"The  Mystery  of  Infants  "  of  this  Quaere, 
all  that  I  have  met  with  are  in  the  dark  as  to 
this  matter.  Dionysius  Exiguus's  Latin  is 
Lac,  etc.  The  Greek  stands  thus,  "Eire  -yd\a 
k.  r.  A. 


CANON  XXXVIII.  (Greek  xli.) 

That  clerics  or  those  who  are  continent  shall  not  visit  virgins  or  loidows. 

Neither  clerics  nor  those  who  profess  continence  should  enter  the  houses  of  widows 
or  virgins  without  the  bidding  or  consent  of  the  bishops  or  presbyters :  and  then  let 
them  not  go  alone,  but  with  some  other  of  the  clergy,  or  with  those  assigned  by  the 
bishop  or  presbyter  for  this  purpose ;  not  even  bishops  and  presbyters  shall  go  alone  to 
women  of  this  sort,  except  some  of  the  clergy  are  present  or  some  other  grave  Chris- 
tian men. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXXVIII. 

Clerics  and  those  who  are  continent  shall  not 
go  to  ividoivs  or  virgins,  unless  at  the  bidding 
of  the  bishop  and  p>resbyter  :  and  even  then  not 


alone,  but  with  those  with  whom  presbyters  and 
deacons  visit  them. 

This  canon  is  canon  xxiv.  of  the  Synod  of 
Hippo,  a.d.  393. 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419  461 

CANON  XXXIX.  (Greek  xlii.) 

Tiiat  a  bishop  should  not  be  called  the  chief  of  the  priests.1 

That  the  bishop  of  the  first  see  shall  not  be  called  Prince  of  the  Priests  or  High 
Priest  (Summits  Sctcerdos)  or  any  other  name  of  this  kind,  but  only  Bishop  of  the 
First  See. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXXIX.  I  the  Prime.     So  in  Numidia,  Nicetius  in  Mau- 

Tlie  first  bishop  shall  not 'be  called  Prince  o/!ritauia>  in  iheo  original  Latin  between  Can. 
the  Priests,  nor  High  Priest,  but  Bishop  of  the :  85>  and  Cau-  m>  and  see,  Can-  86-    , 
first  see  **'     •     Justellus  on  this  canon  shews,  that 

:  Tertullian,  Optatus,  and  Augustine,  did  apply 

This  canon  is  Canon  xxv.  of  the  Synod  of  these  titles  to   their  ow»   African   bishops  ; 

Hippo  a  d  393.  and  therefore  supposes,  that  the  meaning  of 

-r  the  canon  was  to  suppress  the  flame  of  vain 

glory,  which  proceeded  from  these  sparks  of 
"The  bishop  of  the  Prime   See,"  i.e.,  The  lofty  titles, 
primate.     So  Xantippus  is  called  bishop  of  i 

CANON  XL.  (Greek  xliii.) 

Concerning  the  non-frequenting  of  taverns  by  the  clergy,  except  when  travelling. 

That  the  clergy  are  not  to  enter  taverns  for  eating  or  drinking,  nor  unless  com- 
pelled to  do  so  by  the  necessity  of  their  journey. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XL.  This  canon  is  Canon  xxvj.  of  the  Synod  of 

A  cleric  on  a  journey  may  enter  a  tavern,  I  Hippo,  a.d.  393. 
otherwise  not. 

CANON  XLI.  (Greek  xliv.) 

TJiat  by  men  ivho  are  fasting  sacrifices  are  to  be  offered  to  God. 

That  the  Sacraments  of  the  Altar  are  not  to  be  celebrated  except  by  those  who  are 
fasting,  except  on  the  one  anniversary  of  the  celebration  of  the  Lord's  Supper ;  for  if 
the  commemoration  of  some  of  the  dead,  whether  bishops  or  others,  is  to  be  made  in 
the  afternoon,  let  it  be  only  with  prayers,  if  those  who  officiate  have  already  breakfasted. 


NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XLI. 


The  holy  mysteries  are  not  offered  except  by 
those  who  are  fasting. 

This  canon  is  Canon  xxviij.  of  the  Synod  of 


Eucharist,  and  not  the  Eucharist  itself,  and 
that  on  Maunday-Thursday 2  yearly,  before 
the  Eucharist,  they  had  such  a  public  enter- 
tainment in  imitation  of  our  Saviour's  last 
Paschal  Supper.     I  refer  it  to  the  considera- 


Hippo  a.d.  393.  I  ^on  of  the  learned  reader,  whether  St.  Paul, 

by  the  Auttvov  KvpiaKov,  1  Cor.  xi.  20,  does  not 


Johnson. 

From  this  canon  and  the  29th  of  Trullo,  it 
is  evident  that  by  the  Lord's  Supper,  the  an- 
cients understood  the  supper  going  before  the 


mean  this  entertainment.     For  the  obvious 

translation  of  that  verse  is,  "  It  is  not  your 

duty  or  business]  when  you  meet  together 

in  the  church]  to  eat  the  Lord's  Supper." 


•  The  Greek  reads  for  " bishop,"  "a  Primate."  I     2  This  is  Johnson's  spelling  here,  but  not  in  the  last  phrase  of 

I  this  same  note. 


4G2 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


He  would  not  have  them  to  eat  this  supper  in 
the  public  assembly:  "For"  (says  he) 
"  have  ye  not  houses  to  eat  and  drink  in,  or 
despise  ye  the  Church  of  God  ?  "  From  the 
4th  age  forward,  the  Eucharist  was  some- 
times called  the  Lord's  Supper  ;  but  from  the 
beginning  it  was  not  so.  And  even  after  it 
did  sometimes  pass  by  this  name,  yet  at  other 
times  this  name  was  strictly   used  for   the 


previous  entertainment,  as  may  be  seen  by 
this  canon,  which  was  made  in  the  4th  cen- 
tury. Further  it  seems  probable,  that  the 
Lord's  Supper  and  the  Love-feast  was  the 
same,  though  it  was  not  usually  called  the 
Lord's  Supper  ;  but  only  (perhaps)  that  love- 
feast,  which  was  made  on  the  day  of  the  in- 
stitution of  the  Eucharist,  which  we  now  call 
Maundy-Thursday. 


CANON  XLIL  (Greek  xiv.) 

Concerning  the  not  having  feasts  tinder  any  circumstances  in  churches. 

That  no  bishops  or  clerics  are  to  hold  feasts  in  churches,  unless  perchance  they  are. 
forced  thereto  by  the  necessity  of  hospitality  as  they  pass  by.  The  people,  too,  as  fai' 
as  possible,  are  to  be  prohibited  from  attending  such  feasts. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XLII. 


A  cleric  is  not,  to  feast  in  a  church,  unless 
perchance  he  is  driven  thereto  by  the  necessity 


of  hospitality, 
laity. 


This  also  is  forbidden  to  the 


This  canon  is  Canon  xxix.  of  the  Synod  of 
Hippo,  a.d.  393. 


CANON  XLIII.  (Greek  xlvi.) 

Concerning  penitents. 

That  to  penitents  the  times  of  their  penance  shall  be  assigned  by  the  will  of  tii3 
bishop  according  to  the  difference  of  their  sins ;  and  that  a  presbyter  shall  not  recon- 
cile a  penitent  without  consulting  the  bishop,  unless  the  absence  of  the  bishop  urges 
him  necessarily  thereto.  But  Avhen  of  any  penitent  the  offence  has  been  public  and 
commonly  known,  so  as  to  have  scandalized  the  whole  Church,  he  shall  receive  impo- 
sition of  the  hand  before  the  altar  (Lat.  "  before  the  apse"). 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XLIII. 


The.  bishops  shall  fix  the  time  of  penance  for 
those,  doiny  penance  according  to  their  sins.  A 
presbyter  without  his  knoirtedge  shall  not  recon- 
cile one  doing  penance,  even  ivhen  necessity  im- 
pels him  thereto.1 


This  canon  is  canon  xxx.  of  the  Synod  of 
Hippo,  a.d.  393. 

Johnson. 

Here  [i.  e.,  in  translating  absidem  church- 
porch]  I  follow  Zonoras  ;  see  Can.  Nic,  11. 
Du  Pin  renders  absidem,  a  high  place  near 
the  bishop's  throne. 


CANON  XLIV.  (Greek  xlvii.) 

Concerning  Virgins. 

That  holy  virgins  wdien  they  are  separated  from  their  parents  by  whom  they  have 
been  wont  to  be  guarded,  are  to  be  commended  by  the  care  of  the  bishop,  or  presbyter 
where  the  bishop  is  absent,  to  women  of  graver  age,  so  that2  living  with  them  they  may 
take  care  of  them,  lest  they  hurt  the  reputation  of  the  Church  by  wandering  about. 


1  This  last  clause  seems  manifestly  to  be  corrupt  and  should  I 
read  "unless  when,  etc." 


a  The  Latin  is  ant. 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


463 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  or  Canon  XLIV. 
She  who  leaves  her  father  for  the  sake  of  vir- 
ginity is  to  he  commended  to  grave  women. 


This  canon  is  Canon  xxxj.  of  the  Synod  of 
Hippo,  a.d.  393. 


CANON  XLV.   (Greek  xlviii.) 

Concerning  those  who  are  side  and  cannot  answer  for  themselves. 

That  the  sick  are  to  be  baptized  who  cannot  answer  for  themselves  if  their  [servants] 
shall  have  spoken  at  their  own  proper  peril  a  testimony  of  the  good  will  [of  the  sick 
man.] 

(Greek  Canon  xlix.) 

Concerning  players  who  are  doing  penance  and  are  converted  to  the  Lord.1 

That  to  players  and  actors  and  other  persons  of  that  kind,  as  also  to  apostates 
when  they  are  converted 3  and  return  to  God,  grace  or  reconciliation  is  not  to  be  de- 
nied. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XLV. 

That  he  who  cannot  answer  for  himself  on 
account  of  illness  is  to  be  baptized  ivhen  he  shall 
have  given  evidence  of  his  desire. 

A  repentant  actor  is  to  be  received  to  penance. 

This  canon  is  made  up  of  Canons  xxxij.  and 
xxxiij.  of  the  Synod  of  Hippo,  a.d.  393. 


Johnson. 

"Apostates,"  i.e.,  those  who  elsewhere  are 
called  Lapsi ;  those  who  had  done  sacrifice 
through  the  violence  of  torment  in  time  of 
persecution,  professing  in  the  meantime  that 
their  consciences  did  not  consent  to  what 
their  hands  did. 


CANON  XL VI.     (Greek  1.) 

Concerning  the  passions  of  the  martyrs. 

The  passions  of  the  Martyrs  may  be  read  when  their  anniversary  days  are  cele- 
brated. 

NOTE. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XL VI. 
The  passions  of  the  martyrs  are  to  be  read  on 
their  commemorations. 


This  canon  is  the  last  part  of  Canon  xxxvj. 
of  the  Synod  of  Hippo,  a.d.  393. 


CANON  XL VII.    (Greek  li.) 
Concerning  [the  Donatists  and 3]  the  children  baptized  by  the  Donatists. 

Concerning  the  Donatists 4  it  seemed  good  that  we  should  hold  counsel  with  our 
brethren  and  fellow  priests  Siricius  and  Simplician  concerning  those  infants  alone  who 
are  baptized  by  Donatists : 5  lest  what  they  did  not  do  of  their  own  will,  when  they 
should  be  converted  to  the  Church  of  God  with  a  salutary  determination,  the  error  of 
their  parents  might  prevent  their  promotion  to  the  ministry  of  the  holy  altar. 

But  when  these  things  had  been  begun,  Honoratus  and  Urbanus,  bishops  of  Mauri- 


1  Found  only  in  the  Greek. 

51  In  the  Greek  "doing  penance." 

3  Found  only  in  the  Greek. 


4  Not  in  the  Greek. 

6  Latin  reads  "  among  them"  instead  of  "  by  Donatists.' 


464  AFRICAN  CODE.    A.D.  419 

tania  Sitifensis,  said :  When  some  time  ago  we  were  sent  to  your  holiness,  we  laid 
aside  what  things  had  been  written  on  this  account,  that  we  might  wait  for  the  arrival 
of  our  brethren  the  legates  from  Numidia.  But  because  not  a  few  days  have  passed  in 
which  they  have  been  looked  for  and  as  yet  they  are  not  arrived,  it  is  not  fitting  that  wo 
should  delay  any  longer  the  commands  Ave  received  from  our  brother-bishops  ;  and  there- 
fore, brethren,  receive  our  story  with  alacrity  of  mind.  We  have  heard  concerning  the 
faith  of  the  Nicene  tractate  :  True  it  is  that  sacrifices  are  to  be  forbidden  after  break- 
fast,  so  that  they  may  be  offered  as  is  right  by  those  who  are  fasting,  ami  this  has  been 
confirmed  then  and  now. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XLVII.  I  making  a  schism  was,  that  Csecilian,  Bishop 

Wlien  those  in  infancy  baptized  by  Donatists  i  of  Carthage,  had,  in  the  time  of  persecution, 

are  converted,   this   shall  be  no  impediment  to  I  been  a  Traditor,  i.e.,  given  up  the  Bible  to  the 

them.   And  the  Holy  Mysteries,  as  is  right,  are  to   heathen  inquisitors  ;  this  was  denied  by  the 

Orthodox,  who  charged  them  with  the  same 
crime  in  effect,  viz.  of  being  too  favourable 
to  the  Traditors,  and  those  that  had  lapsed. 
They  likewise  are  charged  with  Arianism. 

I  have  omitted  what  is  here  mentioned 
concerning  the  Council  of  Nice ;  because  I  do 
not  find  that  any  one  has  been  able  to  pene- 
trate into  the  meaning  of  the  Fathers  as  to 
that  particular. 


be  celebrated  only  by  them  fasting. 

This  canon  is  made  from  Canon  xxxvij.  of 
the  Synod  of  Hippo,  a.d.  393,  and  from  Can- 
on j.  of  the  Synod  of  Carthage  of  August  28th, 
a.d.  397. 

Johnson. 

See  Can.  41. 

The  pretence  that  the   Donatists  had  forj 


CANON  XL VIII.     (Greek  Hi.) 

Of  rebapiisms,  reordinations,  and  translations  of  bishops. 

But  we  suggest  that  we  decree  what  was  set  forth  by  the  wisdom  of  the  plenary 
synod  at  Capua,  that  no  rebaptisings,  nor  reordinations  should  take  place,  and  that 
bishops  should  not  be  translated.  For  Cresconius,  bishop  of  Villa  Begis,  left  his  own 
people  and  invaded  the  Church  of  Tubinia  and  having  been  admonished  down  to  this 
very  day,  to  leave,  according  to  the  decree,  the  diocese  he  had  invaded,  he  treated  the 
admonition  with  disdain.  We  have  heard  that  the  sentence  pronounced  against  him 
has  been  confirmed ;  but  we  seek,  according  to  our  decree,  that  ye  deign  to  grant  that 
being  driven  thereto  by  necessity,  it  be  free  to  us  to  address  the  rector  of  the  province 
against  him,  according  to  the  statutes  of  the  most  glorious  princes,  so  that  whoever  is 
not  willing  to  acquiesce  in  the  mild  admonition  of  your  holiness  and  to  amend  his 
lawlessness,  shall  be  immediately  cast  out  by  judicial  authority.  Aurelius  the 
bishop  said :  By  the  observance  of  the  constituted  form,  let  him  not  be  judged  to 
be  a  member  of  the  synod,  if  he  has  been  asked  by  you,  dear  brethren,  to  depart  and 
has  refused  :  for  out  of  his  own  contempt  and  contumacy  he  has  fallen  to  the  power  of 
the  secular  magistrate.1  Honoratus  and  Urban  the  bishops  said  :  This  pleases  us  all, 
does  it  not  ?     And  all  the  bishops  answered :     It  is  just,  it  pleases  us. 


NOTES 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XLVIII. 
Let  there  be  no  rcbaptisms,  nor  reordinations 


nor  translations  ofbisho2)S.  Therefore  let  Cres- 
conius be  forbidden  by  judicial  authority,  for  he 
has  left  his  own  people,  and  has  talcen  possession 
of  the  diocese  of  Ceneum,  although  ecclesiastically 
admonished  that  he  ivas  not  to  change. 


This  canon  is  Canon  j.,  of  the  Synod  of 
Carthage  of  August  28th,  a.d.  397.  The  acts 
of  this  synod  were  first  accurately  edited  by 
the  Ballerini  (in  their  edition  of  the  works  of 
St.  Leo)  and  were  printed  by  Mansi,  in  an 
amended  form,  in  his  Concilia. 


1  J  have  followed  the  Greek  text  here,  the  Latin  is  very  confused. 


AFKICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


465 


CANON  XLIX.     (Greek  liii.) 

How  many  bishops  there  should  be  to  ordain  a  bishop. 

Honoratus  and  Urban,  the  bishops,  said :  We  have  issued  this  command,  that 
(because  lately  two  of  our  brethren,  bishops  of  Numidia,  presumed  to  ordain  a  pontiff,) 
only  by  the  concurrence  of  twelve  bishops  the  ordination  of  bishops  be  celebrated. 
Aurelius,  the  bishop,  said :  The  ancient  form  shall  be  preserved,  that  not  less  than  three 
suffice  who  shall  have  been  designated  for  ordaining  the  bishop.  Moreover,  because  in 
Tripoli,  and  in  Arzug  the  barbarians  are  so  near,  for  it  is  asserted  that  in  Tripoli 
there  are  but  five  bishops,  and  out  of  that  number  two  may  be  occupied  by  some  ne- 
cessity ;  but  it  is  difficult  that  all  of  the  number  should  come  together  at  any  place 
whatever ;  ought  this  circumstance  to  be  an  impediment  to  the  doing  of  what  is  of 
utility  to  the  Church  ?  For  in  this  Church,  to  which  your  holiness  has  deigned  to 
assemble  *  we  frequently  have  ordinations  and  nearly  every  Lord's  day  ;  could  I 
frequently  summon  twelve,  or  ten,  or  about  that  number  of  bishops  ?  But  it  is  an  easy 
thing  for  me  to  join  a  couple  of  neighbours  to  my  littleness.  Wherefore  your  charity 
will  agree  with  me  that  this  cannot  be  observed. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XLIX. 
Fewer  than  three  bishops  do  not  suffice  for  the 
ordination  of  a  bishop. 

This  is  Canon  ij.,  of  the  Synod  of  Carthage, 
August  28th,  397. 

Johnson. 

See  Can.  13. 

The  occasion  of  this  canon  was  a  complaint 
that  two  bishops  in  Numidia  had  presumed  to 
ordain  a  third  ;  upon  which  it  was  proposed 
that  not  less  than  twelve  should  perform  this 
office:  But  Aurelius,  Bishop  of  Carthage, 
desires  that  the  old  form  might  be  observed, 
and  three  bishops  be  sufficient ;  especially, 
because  in  Tripoli,  where  there  were  but  five 
bishops  in  all,  it  would  be  hard  to  get  more 
than  three  together.  And  he  adds,  that 
though  it  were  no  hard  matter  for  him  to  get 
two  bishops  to  assist  him  in  his  ordinations 
at  Carthage,  yet  it  would  not  be  practicable 


for  him  to  get  twelve  :  "  For,"  says  he,  "  we 
have  frequently,  and  almost  every  Sunday, 
men  to  be  ordained."  He  must  mean  bishops 
for  otherwise  it  had  been  nothing  to  his  pui'- 
pose,  because  he  could  ordain  priests  or 
deacons  by  himself,  without  the  assistance  of 
other  bishops :  and  yet  it  is  very  strange, 
that  ordinations  of  bishops  should  be  so  fre- 
quent as  to  bear  that  expression  of  "almost 
every  Sunday."  There  were  indeed  above  one 
hundred  bishoprics  in  his  Province ;  but 
these  could  not  occasion  above  six  or  eight 
ordinations  in  a  year  ;  but  it  is  probable  that 
the  privilege  belonging  to  him,  Can.  55, 
brought  very  many  ordinations  to  the  church 
of  Carthage  ;  for  it  is  evident,  there  was  a 
great  scarcity  of  men  fit  for  the  Episcopal 
office  in  Africa.  It  is  further  evident  from 
this  canon,  that  bishops  were  not  ordained  in 
the  church  of  their  own  see,  but  in  that  of 
the  Primate.     See  Can.  Ant.,  19. 


CANON  L.     (Greek  liv.) 

How  many  bishops  should  be  added  to  the  number  of  those  ordaining,  if  any  opposition 
had  been  made  to  the  one  to  be  ordained. 

But  this  should  be  decreed,  that  when  we  shall  have  met  together  to  choose  a 
bishop,  if  any  opposition  shall  arise,  because  such  things  have  been  treated  by  us,  the 
three  shall  not  presume  to  purge-  him  who  was  to  be  ordained,  but  one  or  two  more 
shall  be  asked  to  be  added  to  the  aforesaid  number,  and  the  persons  of  those  objecting 
shall  first  be  discussed  in  the  same  place  (plebe)  for  which  he  was  to  be  ordained.  And 
last  of  all  the  objections  shall  be  considered ;  and  only  after  he  has  been  cleared  in  the 


1  Notice  the  African  use  of  the  phrase  convenire  ad. 
3  The  Greek  reads  "to  depose  him,"  and  varies  considerably 
from  the  Latin.    I  have  followed  the  Latin  but  confess  that  in 


part  I  have  failed  to  catch  a  meaning, 
clear,  as  usual. 


The  Greek  is  perfectly 


VOL.    XIV. 


H  h 


466 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


public  sight  shall  he  at  last  be  ordained.  If  this  agrees  with  the  mind  of  your  holiness, 
let  it  be  confirmed  by  the  answer  of  your  worthiness.  All  the  bishops  said,  We  are  well 
pleased. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  L. 
If  any  controversy  arise  concerning  a  bishop 
ivho  ]ias  been  elected  by  three  bisliojjs,  Jet  tivo 
others  be  coopted,  and  so  let  there  be  an  exami- 
nation made  of  his  affairs;  and  if  it  shall  appear 
that  he  is  pure,  let  him  be  ordained. 

This  canon  is  Canon  iij.,  of  the  Synod  of 
Carthage,  Aug.  28th,  397. 

Johnson. 
Here  the  bishops  meet  to  choose  a  new  one, 


and  it  is  evident  by  the  foregoing  canon,  that 
they  met  not  in  the  vacant  church,  but  in 
that  of  the  Primate ;  and  that  therefore  not 
the  people,  but  the  bishops  had  the  chief 
share  in  the  election.  The  people  might 
make  their  objections,  -which  supposes  they 
knew  who  their  intended  bishop  was ;  but 
the  bishops  were  the  judges  of  the  cause. 
And  it  seems  probable,  that  if  there  were  any 
dispute,  some  of  the  bishops  went  to  the 
vacant  church  to  hear  the  allegations  against 
the  person  that  was  elected,  or  proposed. 


CANON  LI.    (Greek  lv.) 

That  the  dale  of  Easter  is  to  be  announced  by  the  Church  of  Carthage. 

Honoeatus  and  Urban,  the  bishops,  said :  Since  all  things  treated  by  our  commoni- 
tory  are  known,1  we  add  also  what  has  been  ordered  concerning  the  day  of  Easter,  that 
Ave  be  informed  of  the  date  always  by  the  Church  of  Carthage,  as  has  been  accustomed 
and  that  no  short  time  before.  Aurelius,  the  bishop,  said  :  If  it  seems  good  to  your 
holiness,  since  we  remember  that  we  pledged  ourselves  sometime  ago  that  every  year 
we  would  come  together  for  discussion,  Avhen  we  assemble,  then  let  the  date  of  the 
holy  Easter  be  announced  through  the  legates  present  at  the  Council.  Honoratus  and 
Urban,  the  bishops,  said :  Now  we  seek  of  the  present  assembly  that  ye  deign  to 
inform  our  province  of  that  day  by  letters.  Aurelius,  the  bishop,  said :  It  is  neces- 
sary it  should  be  so. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  LI. 

Let  the  day  on  ivhich  Easter  is  to  be  kept  be 
announced  by  the  Church  of  Carthage  in  the 
annual  synod. 


This  canon  is  the  first  part  of  Canon  iv.  of 
the  Synod  of  Carthage,  August  28th,  397. 


Johnson. 
The  synod  met  in  August. 


See  Can.  73. 


CANON  LII.  (Greek  lvi.) 
Of  visiting  provinces. 

Honoeatus  and  Urban,  the  bishops,  said  :  This  was  commanded  to  us  in  word,  that 
because  it  had  been  decreed  in  the  Council  of  Hippo  that  each  province  should  be  vis- 
ited in  the  time  of  the  council,  that  ye  also  deign  that  this  year  or  next,  according  to 
the  order  ye  have  drawn  up,  you  should  visit  the  province  of  Mauritania. 

Aurelius,  the  bishop,  said  :  Of  the  province  of  Mauritania  because  it  is  situated  in 
the  confines  of  Africa,  we  have  made  no  decree,  for  they  are  neighbours  of  the  barba- 
rians ;  but  God  grant  (not  however  that  I  make  any  rash  promise  of  doing  so),  we  may 
be  able  to  come  to  your  province.  For  ye  should  consider,  brethren,  that  this  same 
thing  our  brethren  of  Tripoli  and  of  the  Arzuges  region 2  could  demand  also,  if  occasion 
offered 


'The  Latin  "noscuntur"  is  almost  certainly  corrupt,  Van 
Espen  suggests  "  absolnta  sunt''  as  the  meaning. 

a  Vide  Corripus  (Partsch's  ed.)  Johannid  in  lion.  Germ.  Hist. 
(in  the  Series  Auctores  Antiquissimi),  Proem,  p.  xiv.    It  seems 


from  Orosius  that  the  same  province  was  called  Tripolitana  and 
Regio  Arzugum,  and  that  Arzuges  was  a  race  name  of  wider  ap- 
plication. 


AFRICAN   CODE.    A.D.  419  407 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LII. 
As  the  Synod  at  Hippo  decreed,  every  prov- 
ince should  be  visited  in  an  annual  Synod. 

This  canon  is  the  last  part  of  canon  iv  of 
the  Council  of  Carthage,  August  28th,  a.d.  397. 

Johnson. 
The  manner  of  visiting  provinces,  and  that 


annually  ;  and  the  persons  by  whom  this  visi- 
tation was  performed,  can  scarce  now  be  dis- 
covered ;  only  it  appears,  by  the  words  of 
Aurelius,  that  the  Bishop  of  Carthage  was 
one,  if  not  the  only  visitor  ;  but  it  was  im- 
possible that  he  could  visit  all  the  provinces 
in  Africa  personally  every  year,  he  must  use 
delegates. 


CANON  LIII.     (Greek  lvii.) 
That  dioceses  should  not  receive  a  bishop  except  by  the  consent  of  its  oivn  bishop. 

Epigonius,  the  bishop,  said  :  In  many  councils  it  lias  been  decreed  by  the  sacerdo- 
tal assembly  that  such  communities  as  are  contained  in  other  dioceses  and  ruled  by 
their  bishops,  and  which  never  had  any  bishops  of  their  own,  should  not  receive  rulers, 
that  is  bishops,  for  themselves  except  with  the  consent  of  the  bishop  under  whose 
jurisdiction  they  have  been.  But  because  some  who  have  attained  a  certain  domination 
abhor  the  communion  of  the  brethren,  or  at  least,  having  become  depraved,  claim  for 
themselves  domination  with  what  is  really  tyranny,  for  the  most  part  tumid  and  stolid 
presbyters,  who  lift  up  their  heads  against  their  own  bishops  or  else  win  the  people  to 
themselves  by  feasting  them  or  by  malignant  persuasion,  that  they  may  by  unlawful 
favour  wish  to  place  themselves  as  rulers  over  them ;  we  indeed  hold  fast  that 
glorious  desire  of  your  mind,  most  pious  brother  Aurelius,  for  thou  hast  often  opposed 
these  things,  paying  no  heed  to  such  petitioners  ;  but  on  account  of  their  evil  thoughts 
and  basely  conceived  designs  this  I  say,  that  such  a  community,  Avhich  has  always 
been  subject  in  a  diocese,  ought  not  to  receive  a  rector,  nor  should  it  ever  have  a  bishop 
of  its  own.  Therefore  if  this  which  I  have  proposed  seems  good  to  the  whole  most 
holy  council,  let  it  be  confirmed. 

Aurelius,  the  bishop,  said  :  I  am  not  in  opposition  to  the  proposition  of  our  brother 
and  fellow  bishop  :  but  I  confess  that  this  has  been  and  shall  be  my  practice  concern- 
ing those  who  were  truly  of  one  mind,  not  only  with  regard  to  the  Church  of  Carthage, 
but  concerning  every  sacerdotal  assemblage.  For  there  are  many  who,  as  has  been 
said,  conspire  with  the  people  whom  they  deceive,  tickling  their  ears  and  blandly  seduc- 
ing them,  men  of  vicious  lives,  or  at  least  puffed  up  and  separated  from  this  meeting, 
who  think  to  watch  over  their  own  people,  and  never  come  to  our  council  for  fear  that 
their  wickedness  should  be  discussed.  I  say,  if  it  seems  good,  that  not  only  should 
these  not  keep  their  dioceses,  but  that  every  effort  should  be  made  to  have  them  ex- 
pelled by  public  authority  from  that  church  of  theirs  which  has  evilly  favoured  them, 
and  that  they  be  removed  even  from  the  chief  sees.  For  it  is  right  that  he  who  cleaves 
to  all  the  brethren  and  the  whole  council,  should  possess  with  full  right  not  only  his 
church  but  also  the  dioceses.  But  they  who  think  that  the  people  suffice  them  and  spurn 
the  love  of  the  brethren,  shall  not  only  lose  their  dioceses,  but  (as  I  have  said,)  they  shall 
be  deprived  by  public  authority  of  their  own  cures  as  rebels.  Honoratus  and  Urban, 
the  bishops,  said :  The  lofty  provision  of  your  holiness  obtains  the  adherence  of  the 
minds  of  all  of  us,  and  I  think  that  by  the  answer  of  all  ivhat  you  have  deigned  to 
propose  will  be  confirmed.     All  the  bishops  said :  Placet,  placet. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LIII. 
Wlioso  shall  neglect  his  call  to  a  synod,  and 
shall  despise  the  charity  of  his  brethren,  putting 

H  ll   2 


his  trust  in  the  multitude  ivho  are  tvith  him,  let 
him  be  deprived  of  them  by  the  imperial  author- 
ity. 


468  AFKICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 

This  canon  is  Canon  v.  of  the  Synod  of  |  fies  some  town  or  village  lying  remote  from 
Carthage  of  August  28th,  a.d.  397,  beginning  ■  the  Bishop's  City,  but  belonging  to  his  juris- 
"with  the  second  clause.  diction  ;  and  is  to  be  understood  to  be  a  place 

distinct  from  the  bishop's  church  or  cathe- 
dral. 

See  also  Can.  56  and  Deer.  Anast..  6. 


Johnson. 
It  is  very  evident  that  a  diocese  here  signi- 


CANON  LIV.     (Greek  lviii.) 
That  a  strange  cleric  is  under  no  circumstances  to  be  received  by  another. 

Epigonius,  the  bishop,  said  :  This  has  been  decreed  in  many  councils,  also  just  now 
it  has  been  confirmed  by  your  prudence,  most  blessed  brethren,  that  no  bishop  should 
receive  a  strange  cleric  into  his  diocese  without  the  consent  of  the  bishop  to  whose  juris- 
diction the  cleric  belongs.  But  I  say  that  Julian,  avIio  is  ungrateful  for  the  favours 
bestowed  upon  him  by  God  through  my  littleness,  is  so  rash  and  audacious,  that  a 
certain  man  who  was  baptized  by  me,  when  he  was  a  most  needy  boy,  commended  to 
me  by  the  same,  and  when  for  many  years  he  had  been  fed  and  reared  by  me,  it  is  cer- 
tain that  this  one,  as  I  have  said,  was  baptized  in  my  church,  by  my  own  unworthy 
hands  ;  this  same  man  began  to  exercise  the  office  of  reader  in  the  Mappalien  diocese, 
and  read  there  for  nearly  two  years,  with  a  most  incomprehensible  contempt  of  my 
littleness,  the  aforenamed  Julian  took  this  man,  whom  he  declared  to  be  a  citizen  of  his 
own  city  Vazarita,  and  without  consulting  me  ordained  him  deacon.  If,  most  blessed 
brethren,  that  is  permissible,  let  it  be  declared  to  us ;  but  if  not,  let  such  an  impudent 
one  be  restrained  that  he  may  in  no  way  mix  himself  in  someone's  communion. 

Numidius,  the  bishop,  said  :  If,  as  it  seems,  Julian  did  this  without  your  worthiness 
being  asked  for  his  consent,  nor  even  consulted,  we  all  judge  that  this  was  done  in- 
iquitously  and  unworthily.  Wherefore  unless  Julian  shall  correct  his  error,  and  shall 
return  the  cleric  to  your  people  with  proper  satisfaction,  since  what  he  did  was  con- 
trary to  the  decrees  of  the  council,  let  him  be  condemned  and  separated  from  us  on 
account  of  his  contumacy.  Epigonius,  the  bishop,  said :  Our  father  in  age,  and  most 
ancient  by  his  promotion,  that  laudable  man,  our  brother  and  colleague  Victor  wishes 
that  this  petition  should  be  made*  general  to  all. 


NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  or  Canon  LIV. 


Since  Julian  has  ordained  a  reader  of  Epiyo- 
nius's  to  the  diaconatc,  unless  he  shall  shew  au- 
thority received  from  him  to  do  so,  he  shall  in- 
crease the  penalty  of  his  contumacy. 


This   canon  is  Canon  vj.  of  the  Synod  of 
Carthage,  August  28th,  a.d.  397. 

Johnson. 
See  Canon  of  the  Apostles,  12  (15,  16),  and 
Chalcedon,  10. 


CANON  LV.     (Greek  lix.) 

Tlmt  it  be  lawful  for  the  bishop  of  Carthage  to  ordain  a  cleric  whenever  he  loislies, 

Aubelius,  the  bishop,  said  :  My  brethren,  pray  allow  me  to  speak.  It  often  happens 
that  ecclesiastics  who  are  in  need  seek  deacons  [prcepositis  in  the  Latin] ,  or  presbyters 
or  bishops  from  me  :  and  I,  bearing  in  mind  what  things  have  been  ordained  these  I 
observe,  to  wit,  I  summon  the  bishop  of  the  cleric  who  is  sought  for,  and  I  shew  him  the 
state  of  affairs,  how  that  they  of  a  certain  church  ask  for  a  certain  one  of  his  clergy. 
Perchance  then  they  make  no  objection,  but  lest  it  happen  that  afterwards  they  might 
object  when  in  this  case  they  shall  have  been  demanded  (postulati)  by  me,  who  (as  you 
know)  have  the  care  of  many  churches  and  of  the  ordinands.  It  is  right  therefore  that 
I  should  summon  a  fellow  bishop  with  two  or  three  witnesses  from  our  number.     But  if 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419  469 

lie  be  found  indevotus  [dica3-ocricoTo<;] ,  what  does  your  charity  think  should  be  done  ?  For 
I,  as  ye  know,  brethren,  by  the  condescension  of  God  have  the  care  of  all  the  churches. 
Numidius,  the  bishop,  said  : l  This  see  always  had  the  power  of  ordaining  a  bishop 
according  to  the  desire  of  each  Church  as  he  wills  and  on  whose  name  there  was  agree- 
ment {fuisset  cowoentus).  Epigonius,  the  bishop,  said :  Your  good  nature  makes  small 
use  of  yoiu'  powers,  for  you  make  much  less  use  of  them  than  you  might,  since,  my 
brother,  you  are  good  and  gentle  to  all ;  for  you  have  the  power,  but  it  is  far  from  your 
practice  to  satisfy  the  person  of  each  bishop  in  prima  tantummodo  conventione.  But 
if  it  should  be  thought  that  the  rights  of  this  see  ought  to  be  vindicated,  you  have  the 
duty  of  supporting  all  the  churches,  wherefore  we  do  not  give  thee  power,  but  we  con- 
firm that  power  thou  hast,  viz.  :  that  thou  hast  the  right  at  thy  will  alwa}rs  to  choose 
whom  thou  wilt,  to  constitute  ~  prelates  over  peoples  and  churches  who  shall  have  asked 
thee  to  do  so,  and  when  thou  so  desirest.  Posthumianus,  the  bishop,  said  :  Would  it  be 
right  that  he  who  had  only  one  presbyter  should  have  that  one  taken  away  from  him? 
Aurelius,  the  bishop,  said  :  But  there  may  be  one  bishop  by  whom  many  presbyters  can 
be  made  through  the  divine  goodness,  but  one  fit  to  be  made  bishop  is  found  with  diffi- 
culty. Wherefore  if  any  bishop  has  a  presbyter  necessary  for  the  episcopate  and  has 
one  only,  my  brother,  as  you  have  said,  even  that  one  he  ought  to  give  up  for  promo- 
tion. Posthumianus,  the  bishop,  said  :  If  some  other  bishop  has  plenty  of  clergy,  should 
that  other  diocese  come  to  my  help  ?  Aurelius,  the  bishop,  said  :  Of  course,  when  you 
have  come  to  the  help  of  another  Church,  he  who  has  many  clerics  should  be  persuaded 
to  make  one  over  to  you  for  ordination. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LV. 


op  of  Carthage  extended  to  the  whole  African 
diocese  or  the  six  provinces  of  Africa,  which 
contained  near  five  hundred  bishoprics.  This 
was  what  caused  such  frequent  ordinations  of 
bishops  in  the  Church  of  Carthage  (See  Can. 
Afr.  49,  and  the  Note).  And  it  is  further 
apparent,  that  the  Bishop  of  Carthage  had 
some  power  over  the  whole  African  church, 

m,.      „         .    ,,     r.    ,  i    in    c  n  ••     £  and  was  probably  their  visitor  (See  Can.  52). 

Inis  canon  is  the  first  hall  of  Canon  vii.  o    i,   ,  n    ,,     i    / ,,         i  v    <•      i  •   • 

,i      ri         •■>     *  n    1.1  i    i  t    a  ,    ion    But  that  he  had  the  sole  power  oi  ordaining 

the  Council  of  Carthage   held   August   28th  i  ■  ■>         <■  t        ,    f  •,,    ,,  •  ,       ° 

bishops  lor  every  church,  with  the  assistance 

of  any  two  bishops,  does  not  appear,  though 


It  is  lawful  for  the  bishop  of  Carthage,  when- 
ever he  tvills,  to  choose  those  ivho  are  to  be  set 
over  the  churches  :  even  if  there  were  only  one 
presbyter  ivortluj  of  rule.  For  one  bishop  can 
ordain  many  presbyters,  but  one  fit  for  the  epis- 
copate is  hard  to  find. 


a.d.  397. 

Johnson. 

It  is  evident,  that  this  privilege  of  the  Bish- 


Justellus   is  of  this    opinion  ;  nay,  the  49th 
canon  proves  that  he  had  it  not. 


CANON  LVI.  (Greek  lx.) 

That  bishops  lolw  were  ordained  for  dioceses  shall  not  choose  for  themselves  dioceses  [in 
the  Greek  provinces']. 

Honoratus  and  Urban,  the  bishops,  said :  We  have  heard  that  it  has  been  decreed 
that  dioceses  should  not  be  deemed  fit  to  receive  bishops,  unless  with  the  consent  of 
their  founder  :  but  in  our  province  since  some  have  been  ordained  bishops  in  the  dio- 
cese, by  the  consent  of  that  bishop  by  whose  power  they  Avere  established,  have  even 
seized  dioceses  for  themselves,  this  should  be  corrected  by  the  judgment  of  your  charity, 
and  prohibited  for  the  future.  Epigonius,  the  bishop,  said  :  To  every  bishop  should  be 
reserved  what  is  right,  so  that  from  the  mass  of  dioceses  no  part  should  be  snatched 
away,  so  as  to  have  its  own  bishop,  without  consent  from  the  proper  authority.  For  it 
shall  suffice,  if  the  consent  be  given,  that  the  diocese  thus  set  apart  have  its  own  bishop 

1  The  meaning  of  this  whole  canon  is  very  obscure,  the  text  I       2Migne's  text  reads  this  negatively  "  ut  non  constituas,"  but  I 
is  almost  certainly  corrupt ;  and  the  Greek  in  many  places  in  no  [  have  followed  Labbe  and  Cossart  and  have  omitted  the  "  non." 
way  corresponds  to  the  Latin. 


470  AFKICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 

only,  and  let  him :  not  seize  other  dioceses,  for  only  the  one  cut  off  from  the  many  merited 
the  honour  of  receiving  a  bishop.  Aurelius,  the  bishop,  said  :  I  do  not  doubt  that  it  is 
pleasing  to  the  charity  of  you  all,  that  he  who  was  ordained  for  a  diocese  by  the  consent 
of  the  bishop  who  held  the  mother  see,  should  retain  only  the  people  for  whom  he  was 
ordained.  Since  therefore  I  think  that  everything  has  been  treated  of,  if  all  things  are 
agreeable  to  your  mind,  pray  confirm  them  all  by  your  suffrage.  All  the  bishops  said : 
We  all  are  well  pleased,  and  we  have  confirmed  them  with  our  subscription.  And  they 
signed  their  names. 

I,  Aurelius,  bishop  of  the  Church  of  Carthage,  have  consented  to  this  decree,  and 
have  subscribed  what  has  been  read.  So  too  did  all  the  other  bishops  in  like  fashion 
sign. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LVI. 
Xf  any  diocese  has  received  consent  to  have  a 
bishop  of  its  own  from  him  ivho  has  the  right, 
that  one  shall  not  invade  the  rest  of  the  dioceses. 


This  is  the  last  part  of  Canon  vij.  of  the 
Synod  of  Carthage,  August  28,  a.d.  397. 

Johnson. 

It  had  scarce  been  worth  while  to  give  so 

much  of  this  canon  in  English  if  I  had  not 

thought  it  proper,  in  order  to  confirm  the 

sense  of  the  word  diocese,  mentioned  in  note 


done  when  Cassarius  and  Atticus  were  consuls, 
anno  serse  vulg.  397,  and  there  is  mention  of 
an  embassy  of  two  bishops  from  a  council  of 
Carthage  to  the  Emperors,  to  procure  the 
privilege  of  sanctuary  to  all  impeached  for  any 
crime,  if  they  fled  to  the  Church.  This  is 
said  to  be  done  when  Honorius  and  Eutychi- 
anus  were  consuls,  anno  asrse  vulg.  398.  And 
further,  here  is  an  account  of  a  bishop  sent 
legate  to  Anastasius,  Bishop  of  the  Apostoli- 
cal see,  and  Venerius  of  Milan,  to  supply  the 
African  Church  with  men  fit  to  be  ordained. 
For  Aurelius  complains  that  many  Churches 


on  Can.  53,  viz.,  a  town  or  village,  where  ihave  not  so  much  as  one  man,  not  so  much  as 
there  is  a  church  subject  to  the  bishop  of  the  an  illiterate  one,  in  deacon's  orders,  much  less 
city.  had  they  a  competent  number  of  men  for  the 

Between  this  canon  and  the  following,  there  ■  superior  dignities.  He  speaks  of  the  impor- 
is  a  reference  to  a  former  council  at  Carthage  tunate  clamours  of  many  people,  that  were 
forbidding  bishops  to  sail,  without  a  formal  themselves  almost  killed,  I  suppose,  by  some 
letter  from  the  Primate  ;  and  this  said  to  be  |  common  pestilence. 

In  this  council  it  toas  decreed  that  bishops  should  not  travel  by  sect  without  formed  letters. 

During  the  consulate  of  those  illustrious  men,  Ciesar  and  Atticus,  on  the  sixth  before 
the  Calends  of  July,  at  Carthage,  it  seemed  good  that  no  bishop  should  travel  by  water 
without  "  formed  letters  "  from  the  Primate.  The  authentic  acts  will  be  found  by  him 
who  seeks  them. 

In  this  council,  bishops  whose  names  are  set  down  hereafter  were  sent  as  legates  to  the 
Emperor. 

After  the  consulate  of  the  most  glorious  Emperor  Honorius  Augustus  for  the  fourth 
time,  and  of  the  renowned  Eutychian,  on  the  fifth  of  the  calends  of  May,  at  Carthage  in 
the  secretarium  of  the  restored  basilica.  In  this  council  Epigonius  and  Vincent,  the 
bishops,  received  a  legation,  in  order  that  they  might  obtain  a  law  from  the  most  glori- 
ous princes  in  behalf  of  those  taking  refuge  in  the  Church,  whatever  might  be  the 
crime  of  which  they  were  accused,  that  no  one  should  dare  to  force  them  away. 

In  this  council  a  legation  was  sent  to  tie  Bishops  of  Rome  and  Milan  with  regard  to 
children  baptized  by  heretics,  and  to  the  Emperor  with  regard  to  having  stich  idols  as  still 
remained  taken  away,  and  edso  with  regard  to  many  other  matters. 

After  the  consulate  of  the  renowned  Flabius  Stilico,  on  the  sixteenth  of  the  calends 
of  July,  at  Carthage  in  the  secretarium  of  the  restored  basilica. 

When  Aurelius,  the  Bishop,  together  with  his  fellow-bishops  had  taken  their  seats, 

1  The  common  reading  "  vindicent"  is  almost  certainly  wrong,  and  is  not  even  mentioned  by  Bruns. 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419  471 

the  deacons  standing  by,  Aurelius,  the  Bishop,  said  :  Your  charity,  most  holy  brethren, 
knows  fully  as  "well  as  I  do  the  necessities  of  the  churches  of  God  throughout  Africa. 
And  since  the  Lord  has  vouchsafed  that  from  a  part  of  your  holy  company  this  present 
assembly  should  be  convened,  it  seems  to  me  that  these  necessities  which  in  the  dis- 
charge of  our  solicitude  we  have  discovered,  Ave  ought  to  consider  together.  And  after- 
wards, that  there  should  be  chosen  a  bishop  from  our  number  who  may,  with  the  help 
of  the  Lord  and  your  prayers,  assume  the  burden  of  these  necessities,  and  zealously  ac- 
complish whatever  ought  to  be  done  in  the  premises,  going  to  the  parts  of  Italy  across 
seas,  that  he  may  acquaint  our  holy  brethren  and  fellow-bishops,  the  venerable  and 
holy  brother  Anastasius,  bishop  of  the  Apostolic  see,  and  also  our  holy  brother  Vene- 
rius  the  Bishop  of  Milan,  with  our  necessity  and  grief,  and  helplessness.  For  there  has 
been  withheld  from  these  sees  the  knowledge  of  what  was  necessary  to  provide  against 
the  common  peril,  especially  that  the  need  of  clergy  is  so  great  that  many  churches  are 
in  such  destitution  as  that  not  so  much  as  a  single  deacon  or  even  an  unlettered  clerk 
is  to  be  found.  I  say  nothing  of  the  superior  orders  and  offices,  because  if,  as  I  have 
said,  the  ministry  of  a  deacon  is  not  easily  to  be  had,  it  is  certainly  much  more  difficult 
to  find  one  of  the  superior  orders.  [And  let  them  also  tell  these  bishops]  that  Ave  can 
no  longer  bear  to  hear  the  daily  lamentations  of  the  different  peoples  almost  ready  to 
die,  and  unless  Ave  do  our  best  to  help  them,  the  grievous  and  inexcusable  cause  of  the 
destruction  of  innumerable  souls  Avill  be  laid  at  our  door  before  God. 

CANON  LVII.    (Greek  lxi.) 

That  persons  baptized  token  children  by  the  Donatists  may  be  ordained  clergymen  in  the 
Catholic  Church. 

Since  in  the  former  council  it  was  decreed,  as  your  unanimity  remembers  as  Avell  as1 
I  do,  that  those  who  as  children  were  baptized  by  the  Donatists,  and  not  yet  being  able 
to  know  the  pernicious  character  of  their  error,  and  afterward  when  they  had  come  to  the 
use  of  reason,  had  received  the  knoAvledge  of  the  truth,  abhorred  their  former  error, 
and  Avere  receiAred,  (in  accordance  Avith  the  ancient  order)  by  the  imposition  of  the 
hand,  into  the  Catholic  Church  of  God  spread  throughout  the  world,  that  to  such  the 
remembrance  of  the  error  ought  to  be  no  impediment  to  the  reception  of  the  clerical 
office.  For  in  coming  to  faith  they  thought  the  true  Church  to  be  their  oavli 
and  there  they  believed  in  Christ,  and  received  the  sacraments  of  the  Trinity.  And 
that  all  these  sacraments  are  altogether  true  and  holy  and  divine  is  most  certain,  and 
in  them  the  Avhole  hope  of  the  soiil  is  placed,  although  the  presumptuous  audacity  of 
heretics,  taking  to  itself  the  name  of  the  truth,  dares  to  administer  them.  They  are 
but  one  after  all,  as  the  blessed  Apostle  tells  us,  saying:  "One  God,  one  faith,  one  bap- 
tism," and  it  is  not  lawful  to  reiterate  Avhat  once  only  ought  to  be  administered.  [Those 
therefore  avIio  huve  been  so  baptized]  ha\Ting  anathematized  their  error  may  be  received 
by  the  imposition  of  the  hand  into  the  one  Church,  the  pillar  as  it  is  called,  and  the 
one  mother  of  all  Christians,  where  all  these  Sacraments  are  received  unto  salvation 
and  everlasting  life  ;  even  the  same  sacraments  which  obtain  for  those  persevering  in 
heresy  the  heavy  penalty  of  damnation.  So  that  Avhich  to  those  avIio  are  in  the  truth 
lighteneth  to  the  obtaining  of  eternal  life,  the  same  to  them  avIio  are  in  error  tends  but  to 
darkness  and  damnation.  With  regard  then  to  those  who,  having  fled  from  error,  acknoAvl- 
edge  the  breasts  of  their  mother  the  Catholic  Church,  avIio  belieAre  and  receive  all  these 
holy  mysteries  with  the  love  of  the  truth,  and  besides  the  Sacraments  haAre  the  testimony 
of  a  good  life,  there  is  no  one  avIio  would  not  grant  that  without  doubt  such  persons 
may  be  raised  to  the  clerical  office,  especially  in  such  necessity  as  the  present.  But 
there  are  others  of  this  sect,  who  being  already  clergymen,  desire  to  pass  to  us  Avith 
their  peoples  and  also  with  their  honours,  such  as  for  the  sake  of  office  are  converts  to 
life,  and  that  they  may  retain  them  seek  for  salvation  [i.e.,  enter  the  Church].  I  think 
that  the  question  concerning  such  may  be  left  to  the  graver  consideration  of  our  afore- 


472 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


said  brothers,  and  that  when  they  have  considered  by  their  more  prudent  counsel  the 
matter  referred  to  them,  they  may  vouchsafe  to  advise  us  what  approves  itself  to  them 
with  regard  to  this  question.  Only  concerning  those  who  as  children  were  baptized  by 
heretics  we  decree  that  they  consent,  if  it  seems  good,  to  our  decision  concerning  the 
ordination  of  the  same.  All  things,  therefore,  which  we  have  set  forth  above  with  the 
holy  bishops,  let  your  honourable  fraternity  with  me  adjudge  to  be  done. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  or  Canon  LVII. 
Such  as  have  been   while    children  baptized 
by  the  Donatists  may  be  ordained  should  they 
repent,  anathematise  their  heresy,  and  be  other- 
wise worthy. 

Of  the  three  Introductions  to  Carthaginian 
Councils  which  precede  this  canon,  the  first 
refers  to  the  synod  held  June  26,  a.d.  397  ; 
the  second  to  that  held  April  27,  a.d.  399  ;  and 


the  third  to   that   of  June  15    (or  16),  a.d. 
401. 

The  canon  is  Canon  j.  of  the  Synod  of 
Carthage  of  June  15  (or  16),  a.d.  401.  The 
eight  other  canons  of  this  synod  follow  in  the 
African  Code  in  their  own  order. 

Johnson. 
See  Can.  47,  which  was  made  in  a  former 
synod. 


CANON  LVIII.     (Greek  lxii.) 

Of  the  remaining  idols  or  temples  which  should  be  done  away  by  the  Emperors. 

Whebefoue  the  most  religious  Emperors  should  be  asked1  that  they  order  the  re- 
maining idols  to  be  taken  entirely  away  throughout  all  Africa ;  for  in  many  maritime 
places  and  in  divers  possessions  the  iniquity  of  this  error  still  flourishes  :  that  they 
command  them  to  be  taken  away  and  their  temples,  (such  as  are  no  ornament,  being  set 
up  in  fields  or  out  of  the  way  places)  be  ordered  to  be  altogether  destroyed. 

NOTES. 
Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LVIII.  This  is  Canon  ij.  of  the  Synod  of  Carthage 

The  remains  of  the  idols  should  be  abolished\oi  June  15  (16),  a.d.  401. 
altogether. 

CANON   LIX.     (Greek  lxiii.) 

Thcd  clerics  be  not  compelled  to  give  testimony  in  public  concerning  the  cognizance  of 
their  oivn  judgment. 

It  should  be  petitioned  also  that  they  deign  to  decree,  that  if  perchance  any  shall 
have  been  willing  to  plead  their  cause  in  any  church  according  to  the  Apostolic  law 
imposed  upon  the  Churches,  and  it  happens  that  the  decision  of  the  clergy  does  not 
satisfy  one  of  the  parties,  it  be  not  lawful  to  summon  that  clergyman  who  had  been 
cognitor  or  present,2  into  judgment  as  a  witness,  and  that  no  person  attached  to  any 
ecclesiastic  be  compelled  to  give  testimony. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LIX. 
A  cleric  who  has  decided  a  case  shall  not,  if  it 
be   displeasing,   be  summoned  to  a  tribunal  to 
give  evidence  concerning  it ;  and  no  ecclesiasti- 
cal person  shall  be  forced  to  give  testimony. 

This  is  Canon  iij.  of  the  Synod  of  Carthage, 
June  15  (or  16),  a.d.  401. 


Johnson. 


"According  to  the  Apostolic  law,"  viz.,  that 
of  St.  Paul,  1  Cor.  vi.  1,  2,  etc.  _  I  follow  the 
Greek  scholia  in  rendering  this  canon.  In 
Latin  cognitor  is  he  that  is  solicitor,  or  advo- 
cate, rather  than  the  judge  who  takes  cog- 
nizance. 


J I  have  followed  the  Greek  text.    The  Latin  reads  :  "  Instant 
etiam  alia;  necessitates  religiosis  imperitoribus  postulanda;." 


s  This  must  mean  "  who  had  heard  the  canse  or  been  present  at 
the  hearing,"  and  so  the  Greek  has  it. 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419  473 

CANON   LX.    (Greek  hriii.) 

Of  heathen  feasts. 

This  also  must  be  sought,  that  (since  contrary  to  the  divine  precepts  feasts  are  held 
in  many  places,  which  have  been  induced  by  the  heathen  error,  so  that  now  Christians 
are  forced  to  celebrate  these  by  heathens,  from  which  state  of  things  it  happens  that  in 
the  times  of  the  Christian  Emperors  a  new  persecution  seems  to  have  secretly  arisen  :) 
they  order  such  things  to  be  forbidden  and  prohibit  them  from  cities  and  possessions 
under  pain  of  punishment ;  especially  should  this  be  done  since  they  do  not  fear  to 
commit  such  iniquities  in  some  cities  even  upon  the  natal  days  of  most  blessed  mar- 
tyrs, and  in  the  very  sacred  places  themselves.  For  upon  these  days,  shame  to  say, 
they  perform  the  most  wicked  leapings  throughout  the  fields  and  open  places,  so  that 
matronal  honour  and  the  modesty  of  innumerable  women  who  have  come  out  of 
devotion  for  the  most  holy  day  are  assaulted  by  lascivious  injuries,  so  that  all  approach 
to  holy  religion  itself  is  almost  fled  from. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  oe  Canon  LX. 


The  Greek  feasts  must  cease  to  be  Jcept,  because 
of  their  impropriety,  and  because  they  seduce 
many  Christians,  moreover  they  are  celebrated  on 
the  commemorations  of  the  martyrs. 

This  is  Canon  iv.  of  the  Synod  of  Carthage, 
Aug.  15  (or  16),  a.d.  401. 


Johnson. 
Bishop  Beveridge  and  Tilius's  edition  of 
these  canons,  in  Greek  and  Latin,  number 
the  two  preceding  canons  as  I  have  done  in 
the  margin,  with  the  same  figures  [viz:  63] . 
I  follow  them  in  this  error  because  by  this 
means  the  reader  may  more  readily  be  referred 
from  the  Latin  original  and  from  this  English 
translation  to  the  Greek. 


CANON   LXI.     (Greek  lxiv.) 

Of  spectacles,  that  they  he  not  celebrated  on  Lord's  days  nor  on  the  festivals  of  the  Saints. 

Furthermore,  it  must  be  sought  that  theatrical  spectacles  and  the  exhibition  of 
other  plays  be  removed  from  the  Lord's  day  and  the  other  most  sacred  days  of  the 
Christian  religion,  especially  because  on  the  octave  day  of  the  holy  Easter  [i.e.,  Low 
Sunday]  the  people  assemble  rather  at  the  circus  than  at  church,  and  they  should  be 
transferred  to  some  other  day  when  they  happen  to  fall  upon  a  day  of  devotion,  nor 
shall  any  Christian  be  compelled  to  witness  these  spectacles,1  especially  because  in  the 
performance  of  things  contrary  to  the  precepts  of  God  there  should  be  no  persecution 
made  by  anyone,  but  (as  is  right)  a  man  should  exercise  the  free  will  given  him  by  God. 
Especially  also  should  be  considered  the  peril  of  the  cooperators  who,  contrary  to  the 
precepts  of  God,  are  forced  by  great  fear  to  attend  the  shews. 

NOTES. 
Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXI.  I     This  is  Canon  V.  of  the  Synod  of  Carthage, 

There  shall  be  no  theatrical  representatio7is^ime  15th  (16),  a.d.  401. 
upon  Lord's  days  or  feast  days. 

CANON  LXII.     (Greek  Ixv.) 

Of  condemned  clerics. 

And  this  should  be  sought,  that  they  deign  to  decree  that  if  any  clergyman  of  what- 
ever rank  shall  have  been  condemned  by  the  judgment  of  the  bishops  for  any  crime,  he 
may  not  be  defended  either  by  the  churches  over  which  he  presided,  nor  by  anyone  what- 

1  Here  ends  the  Greek  text. 


474 


AFKICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


ever,  under  pain  of  loss  both  of  money  and  office,  and  let  them  order  that  neither  age  nor 
sex  be  received  as  an  excuse. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXII. 
No  one  shall  justify  a  clergyman  condemned  by 
his  own  bishop. 


This  is  Caii on  vj.  of  the  Synod  of  Carthage, 
June  15  (or  16),  a.d.  401. 


CANON  LXIII.     (Greek  Ixvi.) 

Of  players  tulio  have  become  Christians. 

And  of  them  also  it  must  be  sought  that  if  anyone  wishes  to  come  to  the  grace  of 
Christianity  from  any  ludicrous  art  (ludicra  arte)  and  to  remain  free  of  that  stain,  it  be 
not  lawful  for  anj'one  to  induce  him  or  compel  him  to  return  to  the  performance  of  the 
same  things  again. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXIII. 
Whoever  has  turned  away  from  the  stage  to 
adopt  an  honest  life,  shall  not  be  led  bach  thereto. 

This  is  Canon  vij.  of   the   Synod  of   Car- 
thage; June  15  (or  16),  a.  d.  401. 


Johnson. 
This  canon  is  probably  to  be  understood  of 
slaves  bought  by  their  masters  for  the  service 
of  the  Circ,  or  Theatre. 


CANON   LXIV.    (Greek  Ixvii.) 

Of  celebrating  manumissions  in  church,  that  permission  be  asked  from  the  Emperor. 

Concerning  the  publishing  of  manumissions  in  church,  if  our  fellow  bishops 
throughout  Italy  shall  be  found  to  do  this,  it  will  be  a  mark  of  our  confidence  to  follow 
their  order  [of  proceedings],  full  power  being  given  to  the  legate  we  send,  that  what- 
ever he  can  accomplish  worthy  of  the  faith,  for  the  state  of  the  Church  and  the  salva- 
tion of  souls,  we  shall  laudably  accept  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord.  All  which  things,  if 
they  please  your  sanctity,  pray  set  forth,  that  I  may  be  assured  that  my  suggestion  has 
been  ratified  by  you  and  that  their  sincerity  may  freely  accept  our  unanimous  action. 
And  all  the  bishops  said  :  The  things  which  have  been  enjoined  to  be  done  and  have 
been  wisely  set  forth  by  your  holiness  are  pleasing  to  all. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXIV. 


The  Emperor's  permission  should  besought  to 
allow  the  public  manumission  of  slaves  in  church. 

This  is  Canon  viij.  of  the  Synod  of  Car- 
thage, June  15  (or  16),  a.  d.  401. 


Johnson. 
It  is  certain,  that  in  Italy,  and  some  other 
parts  of  the  Empire,  slaves  were  solemnly  set 
at  liberty  by  their  masters,  in  the  church  and 
presence  of  the  bishop,  from  the  time  of  Con- 
stantine,  but  it  should  seem  this  custom  had 
not  yet  obtained  in  Africa. 


CANON  LXV.     (Greek  lxviii.) 

Concerning  the  condemned  bishop  Equitius. 

Aurelius,  the  bishop,  said :  I  do  not  think  that  the  case  of  Equitius  should  be  passed 
over  in  the  legation,  who  some  time  ago  for  his  crimes  was  condemned  by  an  Episcopal 
sentence ;  that  if  by  any  chance  our  legate  should  meet  him  in  those  parts,  our  brother 
should  take  care  for  the  state  of  the  Church,  as  opportunity  offered  or  where  he  could,  to 


AFKICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


475 


act  against  him.  And  all  the  bishops  said :  This  prosecution  is  exceedingly  agreeable 
to  us,  especially  as  Equitius  was  condemned  some  time  ago,  his  impudent  unrest  ought 
to  be  repelled  everywhere  more  and  more  for  the  good  estate  and  health  of  the  Church. 
And  they  subscribed,  I,  Aurelius,  the  bishop  of  the  Church  of  Carthage,  have  consented 
to  this  decree,  and  after  having  read  it  have  signed  my  name.  Likewise  also  signed  all 
the  other  bishops. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  LXV. 
Equitius,  who  had   been  condemned  by    iJie 
judgment  of  the  bishops,  and  had  behaved  impu- 
dently against  the  ecclesiastical  authority,  ought 
to  be  opposed. 


This  is  Canon  ix.  of  the  Synod  of  Carthage, 
June  15  (or  16),  a.d.  401. 

Johnson. 
See  Can.  Afr.,  78. 


In  this  council  the  letters  of  Anastasius  the  Roman  Pontiff  were  read,  admonishing  the 
Catholic  bishops  concerning  the  Donatists. 

In  the  consulship  of  those  most  illustrious  men  Vencentius  and  Flavins,  on  the  Ides 
of  September,  at  Carthage,  in  the  secretarium  of  the  restored  basilica.  When  Ave  had 
been  gathered  together  in  council  in  the  church  at  Carthage  and  had  taken  our  seats, 
bishops  from  all  the  African  Provinces,  that  is  to  say,  Aurelius,  the  bishop  of  that  see 
with  his  colleagues  (just  who  they  were  is  made  evident  by  their  signatures)  [the  same 
bishop  Aurelius  said]  :  When  the  letters  of  our  most  blessed  brother  and  fellow  priest, 
Anastasius,  bishop  of  the  Church  of  Home,  had  been  read,  in  which  he  exhorted  lis  out 
of  the  solicitude  and  sincerity  of  his  paternal  and  brotherly  love,  that  we  should  in  no 
way  dissimulate  with  regard  to  the  wiles  and  wickednesses  of  the  Donatist  heretics  and 
schismatics,  by  which  they  gravely  vex  the  Catholic  Church  of  Africa,  we  thank  our  Lord 
that  he  hath  vouchsafed  to  inspire  that  best  and  holy  archbishop  with  such  a  pious  care 
for  the  members  of  Christ,  although  in  divers  lands,  yet  builded  together  into  the  one 
body  of  Christ. 


CANON  LXVI.     (Greek  lxix.) 

That  the  Donatists  are  to  be  treated  leniently. 

Then  when  all  things  had  been  considered  and  treated  of  which  seem  to  conduce  to 
the  advantage  of  the  church,  the  Spirit  of  God  suggesting  and  admonishing  us,  we  deter- 
mined to  act  leniently  and  pacifically  with  the  before-mentioned  men,  although  they  were 
cut  off  from  the  unity  of  the  Lord's  body  by  an  unruly  dissent,  so  that  (as  much  as  in  us 
lies)  to  all  those  who  have  been  caught  in  the  net  of  their  communion  and  society,  it  might 
be  known  throughout  all  the  provinces  of  Africa,  how  they  have  been  overcome  by  misera- 
ble error,  holding  different  opinions,  "  that  perchance,"  as  the  Apostle  says,  when  we  have 
corrected *  them  with  gentleness,  "  God  should  grant  them  repentance  for  the  acknoAvledg- 
ing  of  the  truth,  and  that  they  might  be  snatched  out  of  the  snares  of  the  devil,  Avho  are 
led  captive  of  him  at  his  will." 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXVI. 

It  seemed  good  that  the  Donatists  slioidd  be 
treated  kindly  and  with  leniency,  even  if  they 
should  separate  themselves  from  the  Church,  so 
that  perchance  through  their  respect  for  our  great 
gentleness  they  may  be  loosed  from  their  captivity. 


The  introduction  refers  to  the  Synod  of 
Carthage  of  September  13,  401,  and  this  canon 
is  part  of  Canon  j.  of  that  Synod.  We  are  in- 
debted to  the  Ballerini  for  collecting  the  acts 
of  this  Synod  by  a  comparison  of  the  pseudo- 
Isidore,  Dionysius,  Ferrandus  and  the  quota- 
tions contained  in  the  acts  of  the  Synod  of 
Carthage  of  525. 


1  The  Greek  reads  "when  we  have  gathered  them  together." 


476 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


CANON  LXVII.     (Greek  lxx.) 

Of  the  letters  to  he  sent  to  the  judges,  that  they  may  take  note  of  the  things  done  between 
the  Donatists  and  the  Maximianists. 

Therefore  it  seemed  good  that  letters  should  be  given  from  our  council  to  the  African 
judges,  from -whom  it  would  seem  suitable  that  this  should  be  sought,  that  in  this  matter 
they  would  aid  the  common  mother,  the  Catholic  Church,  that  the  episcopal  authority- 
may  be  fortified l  in  the  cities ;  that  is  to  say  that  by  their  judicial  power  and  with  dili- 
gence out  of  their  Christian  faith,  they  enquire  and  record  in  the  public  acts,  that  all 
may  have  a  firm  notion  of  it,  what  has  taken  place  in  all  those  places  in  which  the 
Maximianists,  who  made  a  schism  from  them,  have  obtained  basilicas. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXVII. 

The  secular  arm  must  be  implored  by  synodal 
letters  to  assist  our  common  Mother  the  Catholic 
Church  against  those  by  whom  the  authority  of 
the  bishop  is  despised. 


This  canon  is  the  other  half  of  Canon  j.  of 
the  Synod  of  Carthage,  September  13,  a.d.  401. 

Johnson. 
Maximianists  were  a  sect  bred  out  of  the 
Donatists,  and  separating  from  them. 


CANON  LXVIII.     (Greek  lxxi.) 

That  the  Donaiist  clergy  are  to  be  received  into  the  Catholic  Church  as  clergymen. 

It  moreover  seemed  good  that  letters  be  sent  to  our  brethren  and  fellow-bishops,  and 
especially  to  the  Apostolic  See,  over  which  our  aforesaid  venerable  brother  and  colleague 
Anastasius,  presides,  that  [eVeiSr?  in  the  Greek,  quo  in  the  Latin]  he  may  know  that  Africa 
is  in  great  need,  for  the  peace  and  prosperity  of  the  Church,  that  those  Donatists  who 
were  clergymen  and  who  by  good  advice  had  desired  to  return  to  Catholic  unity,  should 
be  treated  according  to  the  will  and  judgment  of  each  Catholic  bishop  who  governs  the 
Church  in  that  place ;  and,  if  it  seem  good  for  Christian  peace,  they  be  received 
with  their  honours,  as  it  is  clear  was  done  in  the  former  times  of  this  same  division. 
And  that  this  was  the  case  the  example  of  the  majority,  yea,  of  nearly  all  the  African 
Churches  in  which  this  error  had  sprung  up,  testify ;  not  that  the  Council  which  met 
about  this  matter  in  foreign  parts  should  be  done  away,  but  that  it  may  remain  in 
force  with  regard  to  those  who  so  will  to  come  over  to  the  Catholic  Church  that  there  be 
procured  by  them  no  breaking  of  unity.  But  those  through  whom  Catholic  unity  was 
seen  to  have  been  altogether  perfected  or  assisted  by  the  manifest  winning  of  the  souls 
of  their  brethren  in  the  places  where  they  live,  there  shall  not  be  objected  to  them 
the  decree  contrary  to  their  honour  adopted  by  a  foreign  council,  for  salvation  is  shut 
off  to  no  one,  that  is  to  say,  that  those  ordained  by  the  Donatist  party,  if  having  been 
corrected  they  have  been  Avilling  to  return  to  the  Catholic  Church,  are  not  to  be 2  re- 
ceived in  their  grades,  according  to  the  foreign  council ;  but  they  are  to  be  excepted 
through  whom  they  received  the  advice  to  return  to  Catholic  unity. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  LXVIII. 

Those  ordained  by  the  Donatists,  even  though 
their  reception  has  been  forbidden  by  a  foreign 
synod,  since  it  is  truly  good  that  all  should  be 
saved,  if  they  correct  themselves,  let  them  be  re- 
ceived. 

1  In  the  Greek,  "  since  the  episcopal  authority  is  spurned.'' 


Balsamon. 
This  canon  is  special,  for  it  seemed  good  to 
the  fathers  that  such  of  the  Donatists  as  came 
to  the  orthodox  faith  should  be  so  received  as 
to  hold  the  grade  of  their  holy  orders,  even 
though  a  transmarine,  that  is  to  say  an  Ital- 
ian, council  had  decreed  otherwise. 


2  The  Greek  and  Beveridge  introduce  a  second  "  not.' 


AFRICAN  CODE.     A.D.  419 


477 


Aeistenus. 

Those  Donatists  who  are  penitent  and  anath- 
ematize their  heresy  are  to  be  allowed  to  re- 
main in  their  proper  rank,  and  be  numbered 
among  the  clergy  of  the  Catholic  Church, 
because  Africa  was  labouring  under  a 
shortness  of  clergy. 


great 


This  canon  is  Canon  ij.  of  Carthage,  Sept., 
a.d.  401. 

Johnson. 

Whether  the  Donatists'  clergy  should  be  re- 
ordained  was  only  a  point  of  discipline  ;  for 
the  Donatists  retained  Episcopacy.  There- 
fore the  African  fathers,  as  they  leave  other 
churches  to  their  liberty,  so  at  the  same  time 
they  declare  that  they  would  continue  their 
old  practice,  and  leave  every  bishop  to  act  ac- 
cording to  his  own  discretion  in  this  matter. 
Probably,  one  great  motive,  besides  that  of 
peace,  which  they  had  to  this,  was  the  great 
scarcity  of  clergymen  in  Africa,  of  which  Au- 
relius  complains  in  his  speech,  inserted  into 
the  Acts  before  Canon  77  (61),  and  proposes 
that  they  send  to  the  bishops  of  Rome  and 
Milan  for  a  supply.     And  that  this  was  the 


true  reason,  does  in  some  measure  appear 
from  the  words  of  the  Latin  canon  at  large, 
in  which  the  occasion  of  this  decree  is  said  to 
be  propter  neccssitatem.  And  this  is  the  most 
probable  reason  why  it  is  left  to  the  discretion 
of  the  bishop,  whether  to  admit  Donatist  cler- 
gymen as  such,  if  he  had  occasion  for  their 
service.  And  after  all  it  is  clear  from  this 
very  canon,  that  other  churches  had  deter- 
mined this  point  the  contrary  way.  There- 
fore Mr.  Calamy  exceeds  when  he  says  :  "  As 
for  the  Donatists,  all  agree  that  their  orders 
Avere  acknowledged."  Further,  he  would  have 
it  thought  probable,  that  orders  were  not 
always  conferred  among  the  Donatists  by 
persons  superior  to  presbyters.  This  he 
would  infer  from  the  great  number  of  the 
bishops  of  that  faction  in  Africa,  viz.,  278, 
many  of  which  (says  he)  could  be  no  more 
than  parish  ministers.  But  why  so  ?  Were 
there  not  above  four  hundred  Catholic  bish- 
ops ?  And  why  not  as  many  of  one  side  as 
the  other?  If  our  dissenters  of  any  sort  had 
fallen  into  the  Episcopal  form  of  government, 
no  question  but  they  would  have  had  a  bish- 
op in  every  city  at  least,  and  equalled  our 
church  in  the  number  of  prelates. 


CANON  LXIX.     (Greek  lxxii.) 

That  a  legation  he  sent  to  the  Donatists  for  the  sake  of  making  peace. 

It  further  seemed  good,  that  when  these  things  were  done,  legates  should  be  sent 
from  our  number  to  those  of  the  Donatists  whom  they  hold  as  bishops,  or  to  the  peo- 
ple, for  the  sake  of  preaching  peace  and  unity,  without  which  Christian  salvation  can- 
not be  attained  ;  and  that  these  legates  should  direct  the  attention  of  all  to  the  fact  that 
they  have  no  just  objection  to  urge  against  the  Catholic  Church.  And  especially  that 
this  be  made  manifest  to  all  by  the  municipal  acts  (on  account  of  the  weight  of  their 
documents)  what  they  themselves  had  done  in  the  case  of  the  Maximianists,  their  own 
schismatics.  For  in  this  case  it  is  sheAvn  them  by  divine  grace,  if  they  will  but  heed  it, 
that  their  separation  from  the  unity  of  the  Church  is  as  iniquitous  as  they  now  pro- 
claim the  schism  of  the  Maximianists  from  themselves  to  be.  Nevertheless  from  the 
number,  those  whom  they  condemned  by  the  authority  of  their  plenary  council,  they 
received  back  with  their  honours,  and  accepted  the  baptism  which  they  had  given  while 
condemned  and  cut  off.  And  thus  let  them  see  how  with  stupid  heart  they  resist  the 
peace  of  the  Church  scattered  throughout  the  whole  world,  when  they  do  these  things 
on  the  part  of  Donatus,  neither  do  they  say  that  they  are  contaminated  by  communion 
with  those  whom  they  so  receive  for  the  making  of  peace,  and  yet  they  despise  us,  that 
is  the  Catholic  Church,  which  is  established  even  in  the  extreme  parts  of  the  earth,  as 
being  defiled  by  the  communion  of  those  whom  the  accusers  have  not  been  able  to  win 
over  to  themselves.1 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXIX. 
It  seemed  good  that  legates  be  sent  to  preach 
peace  and  unity  to  the  Donatists  ivho  had  been 
converted  to  the  orthodox  faith. 


This  canon  is  Canon  iij.  of  Carthage,  Sep- 
tember, a.d.  401. 


1 1  think  tins  is  the  probable  meaning  of  the  canon, 


478  AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 

CANON  LXX.     (Greek  lxxiii.) 

What  clerics  should  abstain  from  their  toives. 

Moreover  since  incontinence  has  been  charged  against  some  clergymen  with  regard 
to  their  own  wives  it  has  seemed  good  that  bishops,  presbyters,  and  deacons  should 
according  to  the  statutes  already  made  abstain  even  from  their  own  wives ;  and  unless 
they  do  so  that  they  should  be  removed  from  the  clerical  office.  But  the  rest  of  the 
clergy  shall  not  be  forced  to  this  but  the  custom  of  each  church  in  this  matter  shall  be 
followed. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  oe  Canon  LXX. 
Bishops,  presbyters  and  deacons  shall  abstain 
for  their  wives  or  else  be  removed  from  the  ecclesi- 
astical order.  But  the  rest  of  the  clergy  shall 
not  be  forced  to  the  same :  bat  let  the  custom  be 
observed. 


This  is  Canon  iv.  of  Carthage,  September, 
a.d.  401. 

Johnson. 

A  repetition  of  Canon  25  (28). 


CANON  LXXI.     (Greek  lxxiv.) 

Of  those  who  leave  in  neglect  their  ownpeojjle. 

Moreover  it  seemed  good  that  no  one  should  be  allowed  to  leave  his  chief  cathedral 
and  go  to  another  church  built  in  the  diocese,  or  to  neglect  the  care  and  frequent  at- 
tendance upon  his  own  cathedral  by  reason  of  too  great  care  for  his  own  affairs. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  oe  Canon  LXXI.  I      This  is  Canon  vj.  of  Carthage,  September, 

It  seemed  good  that  no  bishop  shall  translate  \  A-D-  401. 


himself  to  another  see,  leaving  his  own,  nor  that 
through  a  care  for  his  own  affairs  he  should  neg- 
lect his  diocese. 


Johnson. 
See  Canons  53  (57),  56  (60). 
"Principalis  Cathedra,"  his  own  Cathedral. 


CANON  LXXII.     (Greek  lxxv.) 

Of  the  baptism  of  infants  when  there  is  some  doubt  of  their  being  already  baptized. 

Item,  it  seemed  good  that  whenever  there  were  not  found  reliable  witnesses  who 
could  testify  that  without  any  doubt  they  were  baptized  and  when  the  children  them- 
selves were  not,  on  account  of  their  tender  age,  able  to  answer  concerning  the  giving  of 
the  sacraments  to  them,  all  such  children  should  be  baptized  without  scruple,  lest  a 
hesitation  should  deprive  them  of  the  cleansing  of  the  sacraments.  This  was  urged  by 
the  Moorish  Legates,  our  brethren,  since  they  redeem  many  such  from  the  barbarians. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  oe  Canon  LXXII.  j  had  been  baptised  or  no  ;  lest  they  might  through 

that  doubt  lose  the  divine  ablution. 
It  seemed  good  that  they  should  be  baptized       Tllis  ig  Canon  vij.  of  Carthage,  September, 
about  whom  there  was  an  ambiguity  wJiethertlicy  I  A  D  ^qj 

CANON   LXXIII.     (Greek  lxxvi.) 

The  date  of  Easter  and  the  date  of  the  Council  shoidd  be  announced. 

Item,  it  seemed  good  that  the  day  of  the  venerable  Easter  should  be  intimated  to 
all  by  the  subscription  of  formed  letters  ;  and  that  the  same  should  be  observed  with 
regard  to  the  date  of  the  Council,  according  to  the  decree  of  the  Council  of  Hippo,  that 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419  479 

is  to  say  the  X.  Cabnds  of  September,  and  that  it  should  be  written  to  the  primates  of 
each  province  so  that  when  they  summon  their  councils  they  do  not  impede  this  day. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXXIII. 
It  seemed  good  that  the  day  of  the  Holy  Easter 
should  be  announced  on  the  day  of  the  annual 
Synod,  or  on  the  tenth  day  before  the  calends  of 
September. 

This  is  Canon  viij.  of  Carthage,  September, 
A.D.  401. 


Johnson. 

See  Can.  51  (55). 

"  The  time  of  council,"  i.e.,  of  the  national 
council  at  Carthage. 

The  Greek  canon  says  r)  irpb  Se/ca  Ka\av&wv 
2e-T€/x/3/DtW,  and  Zonaras  makes  this  the  21st 
of  August,  but  he  mistakes  in  his  calcula- 
tion. 


CANON  LXXIV.     (Greek  lxxvii.) 

That  no  bishop  who  is  an  intercessor  is  to  hold  the  see  where  he  is  intercessor. 

Item,  it  has  been  decreed  that  it  is  not  lawful  to  any  intercessor  to  retain  the  see 
to  which  he  has  been  appointed  as  intercessor,  by  any  popular  movements  and  sedi- 
tions ;  but  let  him  take  care  that  within  a  year  he  provide  them  with  a  bishop  :  but  if  he 
shall  neglect  to  do  so,  when  the  year  is  done,  another  intercessor  shall  be  appointed. 


NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  or  Canon  LXXIV. 
It  seemed  good  that  the  bishop  who  had  been 


This  is  Canon  IX.  of  Carthage,  September, 
A.D.  401. 

Johnson. 
We  here  call  this  officer  "  Guardian  of  the 


call-ed  in  as  an  intercessor,  by  the  zeal  and  dissen- 
sions of  the  people,  should  not  be  alloived  to  be- 
come the  occupant  of  its  throne  :  bid  let  a  bishop  \  spiritualities"  in  the  vacancy  of  the  see. 
be  provided  within  a  year,  or  else  in  the  nextl 
year  let  another  intercessor  be  appointed. 


CANON  LXXV.     (Greek  lxxviii.) 

Of  ashing  from  the  Emperors  defenders  of  the  Churches. 

On  account  of  the  afflictions  of  the  poor  by  whose  troubles  the  Church  is  worn  out 
without  any  intermission,  it  seemed  good  to  all  that  the  Emperors  be  asked  to  allow  de- 
fenders for  them  against  the  power  of  the  rich  to  be  chosen  under  the  supervision  of  the 
bishops. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  LXXV. 

That  the  bishop  be  not  annoyed,  let  Defensors 
be  appointed. 


This  is  Canon  X.  of  Carthage,  September, 
401. 

Johnson. 
See  note  on  Can.  Chalcedou,  23. 


CANON  LXXVI.     (Greek  lxxix.) 

Of  bishops  who  do  not  put  in  an  appearance  at  Council. 

Item,  it  seemed  good  that  as  often  as  the  council  is  to  be  assembled,  the  bishops 
who  are  impeded  neither  by  age,  sickness,  or  other  grave  necessity,  come  together,  and 
that  notice  be  given  to  the  primates  of  their  several  provinces,  that  from  all  the  bishops 
there  be  made  two  or  three  squads,  and  of  each  of  these  squads  there  be  elected  some 
who  shall  be  promptly  ready  on  the  council  day  :  but  should  they  not  be  able  to  attend, 


480 


AFRICAN  CODE.     A.D.  419 


let  them  write  their  excuses  in  the  tractory,1  or  if  after  the  corning  of  the  tractory  cer- 
tain necessities  suddenly  arise  by  chance,  unless  they  send  to  their  own  primate  an 
account  of  their  impediment,  they  ought  to  be  content  with  the  communion  of  their 
own  Church. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  LXXVI. 

Those  tvho  do  not  attend  the  annual  synod, 
unless  they  be  involuntarily  prevented,  must  be 
satisfied  with  the  communion  of  their  own 
churches. 


This  is  Canon  xj. 
401. 


of  Carthage,  September, 

Johnson. 

"  Tractory  "  has  several  significations ;  here 
it  seems  to  denote  the  written  return  made 


by  the  Primate  of  the  province  to  the  synodi- 
cal  letter  sent  by  the  Bishop  of  Carthage. 
In  the  acts  inserted  between  canon  90th  and 
91st  "  Tractoria "  seems  to  denote  the  letter 
of  the  Primate  to  the  inferior  bishops  for 
choosing  legates,  if  it  do  not  rather  denote 
the  Bishop  of  Carthage's  circular-letter  to  all 
the  primates,  as  it  does  in  the  next  para- 
graph. 

[The  penalty  in  the  last  clause  is]  a  very 
singular  sort  of  censure,  and  very  moderate. 
See  Can.  80  (83). 


CANON  LXXVIL     (Greek  lxxx.) 

Of  Cresconius. 

Concerning  Cresconius  of  Villa  Kegis  this  seemed  good  to  all,  that  the  Primate  of 
Numidia  should  be  informed  on  this  matter  so  that  he  should  by  his  letters  summon 
the  aforementioned  Cresconius  in  order  that  at  the  next  plenary  Council  of  Africa  he 
should  not  put  off  making  an  appearance.  But  if  he  contemns  the  summons  and  does 
not  come,  let  him  recognize  the  fact  that  sentence  should  be  pronounced  against  him. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXXVIL  This  canon  was  probably  formerly  an  ap- 

Unless  Cresconius  ivho  has  been  summoned  by  pendix  (so  Hefele  thinks)  to  Canon  xj.,  of  the 
letter  to  the  Synod,  shall  appear,  let  Mm  know  I  Synod  of  Carthage  of  September  13,  401. 
that  he  will  have  sentence  given  against  him. 


CANON  LXXVIII.     (Greek  lxxxi.) 

Of  the  Church  of '  Hvppo-Diarrhytus. 

It  further  seemed  good  that  since  the  destitution  of  the  Church  of  Hippo-Diar- 
rhytus  should  no  longer  be  neglected,  and  the  churches  there  are  retained  by  those  who 
have  declined  the  infamous  communion  of  Equitius,  that  certain  bishops  be  sent  from 
the  present  council,  viz. :  Keginus,  Alypius,  Augustine,  Maternus,  Theasius,  Evodius, 
Placian,  Urban,  Valerius,  Ambivius,  Fortunatus,  Quodvultdeus,  Honoratus,  Januarius, 
Aptus,  Honoratus,  Ampelius,  Victorian,  Evangelus  and  Eogation  ;  and  when  those  had 
been  gathered  together,  and  those  had  been  corrected  who  with  culpable  pertinacity 
were  of  opinion  that  this  flight  of  the  same  Equitius  should  be  waited  for,  let  a  bishop 
be  ordained  for  them  by  the  vote  of  all.  But  if  these  should  not  be  willing  to  consider 
peace,  let  them  not  prevent  the  choosing  for  ordination  of  a  bishop,  for  the  advantage 
of  the  church  which  has  been  so  long  destitute. 


NOTES. 
Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  LXXVIII. 
It  seemed  good  that,  after  Equitius  had  been 
condemned  by   the  universal    rote,  a   bishop   of 


Hippo  should  be  elected,  and  that  they  should  in 
no  way  impede  the  ordination  of  a  prelate  for 
that  church. 


i  All  mention  of  the  "  tractory :'  is  omitted  in  the  Greek  version. 


AFKICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


481 


This  canon  was  likewise  probably  an  ap- 
pendix, to  Canon  xiij,  of  the  Synod  of  Car- 
thage of  September  13th,  401,  according 
to  Hefele. 


Johnson. 
See  Can.  Afr.,  65. 

Here  the  place  of  election  and  consecration 
seems  to  be  the  vacant  see. 


CANON  LXXIX.     (Greek  lxxxii.) 

Of  clerics  who  do  not  take  care  to  have  their  causes  argued  within  a  year. 

It  was  further  decreed  that  as  often  as  clergymen  convicted  and  confessed  *  of  any 
crime  either  on  account  of  eorum,  quorum  verecundiae  parcitur,  or  on  account  of  the 
opprobrium  to  the  Church,  and  of  the  insolent  glorying  of  heretics  and  Gentiles,  if  per- 
chance they  are  willing  to  be  present  at  their  cause  and  to  assert  their  innocence,  let 
them  do  so  within  one  year  of  their  excommunication  ;  if  in  truth  they  neglect  during 
a  year  to  purge  their  cause,  their  voice  shall  not  be  heard  afterwards. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXXIX. 


Wlien  a  cleric  has  been  convicted  of  a  crime, 
if  he  says  his  cause  should  be  heard  upon  appeal, 
let  the  appeal  be  made  within  a  year ;  after  that 
the  appeal  shall  not  be  admitted. 


This  is  Canon  xiij.  of  Carthage,  September, 

A.D.  401. 

Johnson. 
Though  the  Latin  syntax  of  this  canon  is  very 
confused,  and,  I  am  apt  to  think,  corrupted, 
yet  it  is  evident  enough,  that  this  is  the  inten- 
tion of  it. 


CANON  LXXX.    (Greek  lxxxiii.) 

That  it  is  not  permitted  to  make  superiors  of  monasteries  nor  to  ordain  as  clerics  those 
tvho  are  received  from  a  monastery  not  one's  own. 

Item,  it  seemed  good  that  if  any  bishop  wished  to  advance  to  the  clericature  a  monk 
received  from  a  monastery  not  under  his  jurisdiction,  or  shall  have  appointed  him  supe- 
rior of  a  monastery  of  his  own,  the  bishop  who  shall  have  thus  acted  shall  be  separated 
from  the  communion  of  others  and  shall  rest  content  with  the  communion  of  his  own 
people  alone,  but  the  monk  shall  continue  neither  as  cleric  nor  superior. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXXX. 
Whoever  shall  receive  a  monlc  from  a  monas- 
tery not  subject  to  his  jurisdiction,  and  if  he  shall 
ordain  him  to  the  clerical  estate  or  shall  appoint 
him  prior  of  his  monastery,  such  an  one  shall  be 
cut  off  from  communion. 


NOTES. 

This  is  Canon  xiv.  of  Carthage,  September, 
a.d.  401. 

Johnson. 
See  Canons  76  (79)  and  122  (123). 


CANON  LXXXI.     (Greek  lxxxiv.) 

Of  bishops  who  appoint  heretics  or  heathens  as  their  heirs. 

Item,  it  was  ordained  that  if  any  bishop  should  prefer  to  his  Church  strangers  to 
blood  relationship  with  him,  or  his  heretical  relatives,  or  pagans  as  his  heirs,  he  shall  be 
anathematized  even  after  his  death,  and  his  name  shall  by  no  means  be  recited  among 
those  of  the  priests  of  God.  Nor  can  he  be  excused  if  he  die  intestate,  because  being  a 
bishop  he  was  bound  not  to  postpone  making  such  a  disposition  of  his  goods  as  was 
befitting  his  profession. 


VOL.   xiv. 


1  Bruns  says,  Locus  corruptus. 

I  i 


482 


AFRICAN  CODE.     A.D.  419 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXXXI. 
Let  a  bishop  be  anathema  if  he  make  heretics 
and  heathen  his  heirs. 

This  is  Canon  xv.  of  Carthage,  September, 
A.D.  401. 

Johnson. 

There  were  in  this  age  two  written  tables 
kept  in  every  church,  whereof  one  contained 
the  names  of  all  eminent  bishops  and  clergy- 


men now  living,  with  whom  that  church  held 
communion  and  correspondence  ;  the  other, 
the  names  of  all  eminent  bishops,  and  other 
men  of  their  own  or  other  churches,  now 
dead.  The  deacon  rehearsed  all  the  names,  in 
both  tables  at  the  altar,  whenever  the  Eucha- 
rist was  celebrated.  These  tables  were  by  the 
Greeks  called  AiWuxa,  and  by  some  English 
writers  "diptychs."  See  Can.  of  Peter  of 
Alex.,  14. 


CANON  LXXXII.     (Greek  lxxxv.) 

Of  manumissions. 

Item,  it  seemed  good  that  the  Emperor  be  petitioned  with  regard  to  announcing 
manumissions  in  church. 

NOTES. 
Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXXXII. 


The  imperial  permission  must  be  asked  for 
the  making  of  the  manumission  of  slaves  in 
churches. 

Aeistenus. 

This  is  the  same  as  the  sixty-fourth  [Greek 
numbering]  canon,  and  is  there  explained. 


This  is  Canon  xvj.  of  Carthage,  September, 
a.d.  401. 

Johnson. 
A  repetition  of  Canon  G4  (G7). 


CANON  LXXXIII.   (Greek  lxxxvi.) 

Of  false  Memories  of  Martyrs. 

Item,  it  seemed  good  that  the  altars  which  have  been  set  up  here  and  there,  in  fields 
and  by  the  wayside  as  Memories  of  Martyrs,  in  which  no  body  nor  reliques  of  martyrs  can 
be  proved  to  have  been  laid  up,  should  be  overturned  by  the  bishops  who  rule  over  such 
places,  if  such  a  thing  can  be  done.  But  should  this  be  impossible  on  account  of  the 
popular  tumult  it  would  arouse,  the  people  should  none  the  less  be  admonished  not  to 
frequent  such  places,  and  that  those  who  believe  rightly  should  be  held  bound  by  no 
superstition  of  the  place.  And  no  memory  of  martyrs  should  at  all  be  accepted,  unless 
where  there  is  found  the  body  or  some  reliques,  or  which  is  declared  traditionally  and 
by  good  authority  to  have  been  originally  his  habitation,  or  possession,  or  the  scene  of 
his  passion.  For  altars  which  have  been  erected  anywhere  on  account  of  dreams  or 
inane  gwm-revelations  of  certain  people,  should  be  in  every  way  disapproved  of. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  LXXXIII. 

An  altar  in  the  fields  or  in  a  vineyard  which 

lacks  the  reliques  of  the  martyrs  should  be  thrown 

down  unless  it  would  cause  a  public  tumult  to 

do  so :  and  the  same  is  the  case  with  such  as  have 


been  set  up  on  account  of  dreams  and  false  reve- 
lations. 

This  is  Canon  xvij.  of  Carthage,  September, 

A.D.  401. 


CANON  LXXXIV.   (Greek  lxxxvii.) 

Of  extirpating  the  remains  of  the  idols. 

Item,  it  seemed  good  to  petition  the  most  glorious  Emperors  that  the  remains  of 
idolatry  not  only  in  images,  but  in  any  places  whatever  or  groves  or  trees,  should  alto- 
gether be  taken  away. 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419  483 


NOTES 
Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXXXIV. 


Let  all  remains  of  idolatry  be  abolished  whether 
in  statues,  or  in  places,  or  groves  or  trees. 


This  is  Canon  xviij.  of  Carthage,  September, 
a.d.  401. 

Johnson. 
See  Canon  58  (62.) 


CANON   LXXXV.    (Greek  kxxviii.) 

Tlmt  by  the  bishop  of  Carthage,  when  there  shall  be  need,  letters  shall  be  written  and 
subscribed  in  the  name  of  all  the  bishops. 

It  was  said  by  all  the  bishops  :  If  any  letters  are  to  be  composed  in  the  name  of  the 
council  it  seemed  good  that  the  venerable  bishop  who  presides  over  this  See  should 
vouchsafe  to  dictate  and  sign  them  in  the  name  of  all,  among  which  also  are  those  to  the 
episcopal  legates,  who  are  to  be  sent  throughout  the  African  provinces,  in  the  matter  of 
the  Donatists ;  and  it  seemed  good  that  the  letters  given  them  should  contain  the  tenor 
of  the  mandate  which  they  are  not  to  go  beyond.  And  they  subscribed :  I,  Aurelius, 
bishop  of  the  church  of  Carthage  have  consented  to  this  decree  and  having  read  it  have 
signed  it.     Likewise  all  the  rest  of  the  bishops  subscribed. 


This  is  Canon  xix.  of  Carthage,  September, 
a.p.  401. 


NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXXXV. 
It  seemed  good  that  whatever  letters  were  to  be 
sent  from  the  Synod  shoidd  be  written  and  sub- 
scribed by  the  bishop  of  Carthage  in  the  name 
of  all. 

In  this  Council  previous  decrees  are  confirmed. 

In  the  fifth  consulate  of  the  most  glorious  Emperors  Arcadius  and  Honorius,  Augusti, 
the  VI  Calends  of  September,  in  the  City  of  Milevis,  in  the  secretarium  of  the  basilica, 
when  Aurelius  the  bishop  of  Carthage  had  taken  his  seat  in  plenary  council,  the  deacons 
standing  by,  Aurelius,  the  bishop,  said :  Since  the  body  of  the  holy  Church  is  one,  and 
there  is  one  head  of  all  the  members,  it  has  come  to  pass  by  the  divine  permission  and 
assistance  given  to  our  weakness,  that  we,  invited  out  of  brotherly  love,  have  come  to 
this  church.  "Wherefore  I  beg  your  charity  to  believe  that  our  coining  to  you  is  neither 
superfluous,  nor  unacceptable  to  all;  and  that  the  consent  of  all  of  us  may  make  it 
manifest  that  we  agree  with  the  decrees  already  confirmed  by  the  Council  at  Hijipo  or 
which  were  defined  afterwards  by  a  larger  synod  at  Carthage,  these  shall  now  be  read  to 
us  in  order.  Then  at  last  the  agreement  of  your  holiness  will  appear  clearer  than  light, 
if  they  know  that  the  things  lawfully  defined  by  us  in  former  councils,  ye  have  set 
forth,  not  only  by  your  consent  to  these  acts,  but  also  by  your  subscriptions. 

Xantippus,  bishop  of  the  first  see  of  Numidia  said :  I  believe  what  pleased  all  the 
brethren  and  the  statutes  they  confirmed  with  their  hands ;  we  by  our  subscribing  our 
names  shew  that  it  pleases  us  also,  and  have  confirmed  them  with  our  superscription. 

Nicetius,  the  bishop  of  the  first  see  of  Mauritania  Sitifensis  said :  The  decrees  which 
have  been  read,  since  they  do  not  lack  reason,  and  have  been  approved  by  all,  these  also 
are  pleasing  to  my  littleness,  and  I  will  confirm  them  with  my  subscription. 

CANON   LXXXVI.     (Greek  lxxxix.) 

Of  the  order  of  bishops,  that  those  ordained  more  recently  do  not  dare  to  take  pre- 
cedence of  those  ordained  before  them. 

Valentine,  the  bishop,  said :  If  your  good  patience  will  permit,  I  follow  the  things 
which  were  done  in  time  past  in  the  Church  of  Carthage,  and  which  were  illustrious 
having  been  confirmed  by  the  subscriptions  of  the  brethren,  and   I   profess   that   we 

i  i  2 


484 


AFRICAN  CODE.     A.D.  419 


intend  to  preserve  this.  For  this  we  know,  that  ecclesiastical  discipline  has  always 
remained  inviolate :  therefore  let  none  of  the  brethren  dare  to  place  himself  before 
those  ordained  earlier  than  himself  ;  but  by  the  offices  of  charity  this  has  always  been 
shewn  to  those  ordained  earlier,  Avhich  always  should  be  accepted  joyfully  by  those 
ordained  more  recentty.  Let  your  holiness  give  command  that  this  order  be  strength- 
ened by  your  interlocutions.  Aurelius,  the  bishop,  said  :  It  would  not  be  fitting  that 
we  should  repeat  these  things,  were  it  not  for  the  existence  of  certain  inconsiderate 
minds,  which  would  induce  us  to  making  such  statutes ;  but  this  is  a  common  cause 
about  which  our  brother  and  fellow  bishop  has  spoken,  that  each  one  of  us  should  recog- 
nize the  order  decreed  to  him  by  God,  and  that  the  more  recent  should  defer  to  the 
earlier  ordained,  and  they  should  presume  to  do  nothing  when  these  have  not  been  con- 
sulted. Wherefore  I  say,  now  that  I  think  of  it,  that  they  who  think  they  may  presume 
to  take  precedence  over  those  ordained  before  them,  should  be  coerced  suitably  by  the 
great  council.  Xantippus,  bishop  of  the  first  see  of  Nurnidia,  said :  All  the  brethren 
present  have  heard  Avhat  our  brother  and  fellow  bishop  Aurelius  has  said,  what  answer 
do  we  make  ?  Datian,  the  bishop,  said  :  The  decrees  made  by  our  ancestors  should  be 
strengthened  by  our  assent,  so  that  the  action  taken  by  the  Church  of  Carthage  in  past 
synods  should  hold  fast,  being  confirmed  by  the  full  assent  of  all  of  us.  And  all  the 
bishops  said  :  This  order  has  been  preserved  by  our  fathers  and  by  our  ancestors,  and 
shall  be  preserved  by  us  through  the  help  of  God,  the  rights  of  the  primacy  of  Numidia 
and  of  Mauritania  being  kept  intact. 

Of  the  archives  and  matricula  of  Numidia. 

Moreover  it  seemed  good  to  all  the  bishops  who  subscribed  in  this  council  that  the 
matricula  and  the  archives  of  Numidia  should  be  at  the  first  see  and  in  the  Metropolis, 
that  is  Constantina. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  LXXXVI. 

Thou  shalt  not  prefer  thyself  to  thine  elders, 
but  shalt  follow  tJiem.  For  lie  that  spurns  those 
who  ivere  before  him  should  be  frowned  down 
upon. 

The  introduction  belongs  to  the  Synod  of 
Milevis,  of  August  27,  a.d.  402. 

This  canon  (lxxxvj.)  is  Canon  j.,  of  the 
above  named  Synod. 

Johnson. 

From  this  canon  it  appears  that  the  prim- 
acy in  Africa  was  ambulatory,  and  belonged 


to  the  senior  bishop  of  the  province.  If  the 
primacy  had  been  fixed  to  the  bishop  of  any 
certain  city,  as  in  other  countries,  there  would 
have  been  a  salvo  or  exception  for  that  bishop, 
as  there  is  in  the  24th  canon  of  the  Synod  of 
Bracara  [Braga]  in  Spain,  which  orders  that 
all  bishops  take  place  according  to  their 
seniority,  with  a  reserve  to  the  bishop  of  the 
metropolis.  The  bishoj}  of  Carthage  was  not 
included  in  this  canon  ;  for  it  is  evident  that 
he  had  a  precedence  annexed  to  his  see,  and 
that  he  was  in  reality  a  sort  of  patriarch.  The 
reason  why  Numidia  and  Mauritania  are 
particularly  mentioned  is,  that  some  disputes 
had  been  started  there  on  that  subject. 


CANON  LXXXVII.      (Greek  xc.) 

Concerning  Quodvultdeus,  the  bishop. 

In  the  case  of  Quodvultdeus  of  Centuria,  it  pleased  all  the  bishops  that  no  one 
should  communicate  with  him  until  his  cause  should  be  brought  to  a  conclusion,  for  his 
accuser  when  he  sought  to  bring  the  cause  before  our  council,  upon  being  asked  whether 
he  was  willing  with  him  to  be  tried  before  the  bishops,  at  first  said  that  he  was,  but  on 
another  day  answered  that  he  was  not  willing,  and  went  away.  Under  these  circum- 
stances to  deprive  him  of  his  bishoprick,  before  the  conclusion  of  his  cause  was  known, 
could  commend  itself  to  no  Christian  as  a  just  act. 


AFIUCAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


485 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXXXVII. 

Since  Quodvultdcus  at  first  promised  to  come 
to  our  synod  when  his  opposer  had  asked  that  he 
be  admitted,  and  afterwards  tvithdrcw,  saying  that 
that  was  displeasing  to  him,  he  should  he  excom- 


municated, until  the  cause  is  finished.  But  it 
is  not  just  that  he  be  deposed  before  sentence  is 
given. 

This  canon  is  part  of  Canon  ij.  of  Synod  of 
Milevis,  a.d.  402. 


CANON  LXXXVIII.     (Greek  xci.) 

Of  Maximian,  the  bishoj). 

But  in  the  case  of  Maximian  of  Vagai l  it  seemed  good  that  letters  be  sent  from  the 
council  both  to  him  and  to  his  people ;  that  he  should  vacate  the  bishoprick,  and  that 
they  should  request  another  to  be  appointed  for  them. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXXXVIII.  This  canon  is  remaining  part  of  Canon  ij., 

Let  Maximian  of  Bagai  be  expelled  from  his  j  of  the  Synod  of  Milevis,  a.d.  402. 
church,  and  another  be  set  in  his  room. 


CANON  LXXXIX.     (Greek  xcii.) 

That  bishops  who  are  ordained  shcdl  receive  letters  from  their  ordainers  bearing  the 
date  and  the  name  of  the  consul. 

It  further  seemed  good  that  whoever  thereafter  should  be  ordained  by  the  bishops 
throughout  the  African  provinces,  should  receive  from  their  ordainers  letters,  written  in 
their  own  hands,  containing  the  name  of  the  consul  and  the  date,  that  no  altercation 
might  arise  concerning  which  were  ordained  first  and  which  afterwards. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  LXXXIX. 

Whoever  is  ordained  in  Africa  let  him  have 
letters  signed  by  the  proper  hand  of  him  that  or- 
dained him,  containing  the  date  and  the  name  of 
the  Consul. 

Thia  is  Canon  iij.  of  Milevis,  a.d.  402. 


Johnson. 
It  is  evident  from  this  canon  that  the 
church  in  this  age  followed  the  date  of  the 
civil  government,  which  was  in  the  consulship 
of  Caius  and  Titius,  as  our  civil  date  is  in  the 
1st,  2d,  3d,  etc.,  year  of  the  reign  of  our  King 
or  Queen. 


CANON  XC.    (Greek  xciii.) 
Of  those  who  have  once  read  in  church,  that  they  cannot  be  advanced  by  others. 

Item,  it  seemed  good  that  Avhoever  in  church  even  once  had  read  should  not  be  ad- 
mitted to  the  ministry  (clericatum)  by  another  church. 

And  they  subscribed  :  I,  Aurelius,  bishop  of  the  Church  of  Carthage,  have  consented 
to  this  decree,  and,  having  read  it,  have  signed  it.     Likewise  also  the  rest  of  the  bishops 


signed. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XC. 
Be  who  has  only  once  read  in  a  Church  [i.e., 


diocese]  shall  not  be  admitted  into  the  clergy  by 
another  Church. 

This  is  Canon  iv.  of  Milevis,  402. 


1  Hefele  says  (Hist,  Councils.    Vol.  II.,  p.  428)  that  Vagienscm  not  Bagajensem  is  the  true  reading. 


486  AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


There  is  set  forth  in  this  council  lohat  the  bishops  did  icho  ivere  sent  as  legates  across 
seas. 

In  the  consulship  of  those  most  illustrious  men,  the  most  glorious  Emperor  Theo- 
dosius  Augustus,  and  Kumoridus,  the  VIII. l  Calends  of  September,  at  Carthage,  in  the 
basilica  of  the  second  region,  when  Aurelius  the  bishop  had  taken  his  seat  in  plenary 
council,  the  deacons  standing  by,  Aurelius,  the  bishop,  said  :  From  stress  of  circum- 
stances, venerable  brethren,  I,  although  so  small,  have  been  led  to  assemble  you  in 
council.  For  a  while  ago,  as  your  holinesses  will  remember,  while  holding  a  council  we 
sent  our  brothers  as  legates  to  the  regions  beyond  seas.  It  is  right  that  these  should 
at  this  meeting  of  your  holinesses  narrate  the  course  of  their  now  finished  legation,  and 
although  yesterday  when  we  were  in  session  concerning  this  matter,  besides  ecclesias- 
tical matters,  we  paid  some  prolonged  attention  to  what  they  had  done,  nevertheless  it 
is  right  that  to-day  the  discussion  of  yesterday  should  be  confirmed  by  ecclesiastical 
action. 

Of  the  bishops  of  the  African  provinces  who  were  not  present  at  this  council? 

The  right  order  of  things  demands  that  first  of  all  we  should  enquire  concerning  our 
brethren  and  fellow  bishops,  who  were  to  come  to  this  council  either  from  Byzacena  or 
at  least  from  Mauritania,  like  as  they  decreed  that  they  would  be  present  in  this  council. 
And  when  Philologius,  Geta,  Venustianus,  and  Felician,  bishops  of  the  province  of  By- 
zacena had  presented  and  read  their  letters  of  legation,  and  Lucian  and  Sifvanus,  le- 
gates of  the  province  of  Mauritania  Sitiphensis,  had  done  the  same,  the  bishop  Aurelius 
said  :  Let  the  text  of  these  writings  be  placed  in  the  acts. 

Of  the  Byzacenc  bishops. 

Numidius,  the  bishop,  said  :  We  observe  that  our  brethren  and  fellow  bishops  of  the 
province  of  Byzacena  and  of  the  province  of  Mauritania  Sitiphensis  have  sent  legates 
to  the  council ;  we  now  seek  Avhether  the  legates  of  Nuinidia  have  come,  or  at  least  of 
the  province  of  Tripoli  or  of  Mauritania-CaBsariensis. 

Of  the  bishops  of  Mauritania  Sitiphensis. 

Lucian  and  Silvanus,  the  bishops,  legates  of  the  Province  of  Mauritania  Sitiphensis 
said  :  The  tractory  came  late  to  our  Caesarian  brethren  or  they  would  have  been  here ; 
and  they  will  certainly  come,  and  we  are  confident  of  their  attitude  of  mind  that  what- 
ever shall  be  determined  by  this  council,  they  without  doubt  will  assent  unto. 

Of  the  bishops  of  Numidia. 

Alypius,  bishop  of  the  church  of  Tagaste  said :  We  have  come  from  Numidia,  I  and 
the  holy  brethren  Augustine  and  Possidius,  but  a  legation  could  not  be  sent  from  Nu- 
midia, because  by  the  tumult  of  the  recruits  the  bishops  have  either  been  prevented  from 
coming  or  fully  occupied  by  their  own  necessary  affairs  in  their  sees.  For  after  I  had 
brought  to  the  holy  Senex  Xantippus  your  holiness's  tractory,  this  seemed  good  in  the 
present  business  that  a  council  should  be  appointed,  to  which  a  delegation  with  instruc- 
tions should  be  sent,  but  when  I  reported  to  him  in  later  letters  the  impediment  of  the 
recruits,  of  which  I  have  just  spoken,  he  excused  them  by  his  own  rescripts.  Aurelius, 
the  bishop,  said  :  There  is  no  doubt  that  the  aforesaid  brethren  and  bishops  of  Numidia, 
when  they  shall  have  received  the  acts  of  the  council,  will  give  their  consent  and  will 
take  pains  to  carry  into  effect  whatever  shall  have  been  adopted.  It  is  therefore  neces- 
sary that  by  the  solicitude  of  this  see  what  we  shall  have  determined  be  communicated 
to  them. 

1  Nine,  in  some  MSS. 

5  In  the  Greek  this  is  made  part  of  the  last  sentence,  and  for  "  Of "  it  reads  "  for  the  sake  of  "  (Sid). 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419  487 

Of  the  bishops  of  Tripoli. 

This  is  what  I  could  learn  concerning  our  brethren  of  Tripoli,  that  they  appointed 
our  brother  Dulcicius  as  a  legate :  but  because  he  could  not  come,  certain  of  our  sons 
coming  from  the  aforesaid  province  asserted  that  the  aforesaid  had  taken  shipping,  and 
that  it  was  thought  that  his  arrival  had  been  delayed  by  storms  ;  nevertheless  also  con- 
cerning these  matters,  if  your  charity  is  willing,  this  form  shall  be  preserved,  that  the 
placets  of  the  council  be  sent  to  them.  And  all  the  bishops  said  :  What  your  holiness 
has  decreed  pleases  us  all. 

CANON  XCI.    (Greek  xciv.) 

Of  holding  meetings  with  the  Donatists. 

Aurelius,  the  bishop,  said :  What  has  come  out  in  the  handling  of  your  charity,  I 
think  this  should  be  confirmed  by  ecclesiastical  acts.  For  the  profession  of  all  of  you 
shews  that  each  one  of  us  should  call  together  in  his  city  the  chiefs  of  the  Donatists 
either  alone  and  with  one  of  his  neighbour  bishops,  so  that  in  like  manner  in  the  differ- 
ent cities  and  places  there  should  be  meetings  of  them  assembled  by  the  magistrates  or 
seniors  of  the  places.  And  let  this  be  made  an  edict  if  it  seems  good  to  all.  And  all 
the  bishops  said :  It  seems  good  to  all,  and  Ave  all  have  confirmed  this  with  our  sub- 
scription. Also  we  desire  that  your  holiness  sign  the  letters  to  be  sent  from  the  council 
to  the  judges.  Aurelius,  the  bishop,  said  :  If  it  seems  good  to  your  charity,  let  the  form 
of  summoning  them  be  read,  in  order  that  we  all  may  hold  the  same  tenour'of  proceed- 
ing.    All  the  bishops  said :  Let  it  be  read.     Lgetus  the  Notary  read. 


NOTES 

Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XCI. 
Let  each  of  the  bishojis  meet  with  the  leaders 
of  the  Donatists  in  his  own  city;  or  let  him  as- 
sociate with  himself  a  neighbouring  bishop,  that 
they  together  may  meet  them. 


This  introduction  together  with  the  propo- 
sitions of  the  different  bishops  belongs  to  the 
Synod  of  Carthage  of  August,  403. 

This  canon  (xcj.)  is  Canon  j.  of  that  synod. 


CANON  XCII.   (Greek  xcv.) 

Form  of  convening  the  Donatists. 

That  bishop  of  that  church  said :  What  by  the  authority  of  that  most  ample  see  we 
shall  have  impetrated,  we  ask  your  gravity  to  have  read,  and  that  you  order  it  to  be 
joined  to  the  acts  and  carried  into  effect.  When  the  jussio  had  been  read  and  joined  to 
the  acts,  the  bishop  of  the  Catholic  Church,1  said :  Vouchsafe  to  listen  to  the  mandate 
to  be  sent  through  your  gravity  to  the  Donatists,  and  to  insert  it  in  the  acts,  and  to 
carry  it  to  them,  and  informs  us  in  your  acts  of  their  answer.  "  We,  sent  by  the  au- 
thority of  our  Catholic  Council,  have  called  you  together,  desiring  to  rejoice  in  your  cor- 
rection, bearing  in  mind  the  charity  of  the  Lord  who  said  :  Blessed  are  the  peacemakers, 
for  they  shall  be  called  the  children  of  God ;  and  moreover  he  admonished  through  the 
prophet  those  who  say  they  are  not  our  brothers,  that  we  ought  to  say :  Ye  are  our 
brethren.  Therefore  you  ought  not  to  despise  this  pacific  commonitory  coming  of  love, 
so  that  if  ye  think  we  have  any  part  of  the  truth,  ye  do  not  hesitate  to  say  so :  that  is, 
when  your  council  is  gathered  together,  ye  delegate  of  your  number  certain  to  whom  you 
intrust  the  statement  of  your  case ;  so  that  we  may  be  able  to  do  this  also,  that  there 
shall  be  delegated  from  our  Council  who  with  them  delegated  by  you  may  discuss  peace- 
fully, at  a  determined  place  and  time,  whatever  question  there  is  which  separates  your 
communion  from  us ;  and  that  at  length  the  old  error  may  receive  an  end  through  the 
assistance  of  our  Lord  God,  lest  through  the  animosity  of  men,  weak  souls,  and  ignorant 

1  i.e.  Carthage.    Migne  reads  "  of  that  Church  "  and  differs  in  what  follows. 


488  AFKICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 

people  should  perish  by  sacrilegious  dissension.  But  if  ye  shall  accept  this  proposition 
in  a  fraternal  spirit,  the  truth  will  easily  shine  forth,  but  if  ye  are  not  willing  to  do  this, 
your  distrust  will  be  easily  known."  And  when  this  had  been  read,  all  the  bishops  said : 
This  pleases  us  well,  so  let  it  be.  And  they  subscribed :  I,  Aurelius,  bishop  of  the 
Carthaginian  Church,  have  consented  to  this  decree,  and  having  read  it,  nave  subscribed 
it.     Likewise  also  the  rest  of  the  bishops  signed. 

lids  synod  sent  a  legation  to  the  Princes  against  the  Donatists. 

The  most  glorious  emperor  Honorius  Augustus,  being  consul  for  the  sixth  time,  on 
the  Calends  of  July,  at  Carthage  in  the  basilica  of  the  second  region.  In  this  council 
Tlieasius  and  Euodius  received  a  legation  against  the  Donatists.  In  this  council  was 
inserted  the  commonitorium  which  follows. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XCII. 
What  things  should  be  said  to  the  Donatists  arc 
these  :  "  We  greatly  desire  to  rejoice  in  your  con- 
version ;  for  wc  have  been  commanded  to  say  even 
to  those  not  desiring  to  be  our  brethren,  'Ye  are 
our  brothers.''  Wc  come  therefore  to  you  and  wc 
exhort  you  that  if  you  have  any  defence  to  malec, 


ye  should  appoint  certain  persons  to  whom  this 
should  be  entrusted,  who,  at  a  fixed  time  and 
place,  shall  urge  your  case ;  otherwise  your  dis- 
trust will  be  thenceforward  patent." 

This  canon  is  Canon  ij.  of  the  Synod  of 
Carthage  of  August  25,  a.d.  403. 


CANON  XCIII.     (Greek  xcvi.) 
The  character  of  the  Commonitory  which  the  legates  received  against  the  Donatists. 

The  Commonitorium  for  our  brothers  Tlieasius  and  Evodius,  sent  as  legates  from 
the  Council  of  Carthage  to  the  most  glorious  and  most  religious  princes.  When  by  the 
help  of  the  Lord  they  are  come  into  the  presence  of  the  most  pious  princes,  they  shall  de- 
clare to  them  with  what  fulness  of  confidence,  according  to  the  direction  of  the  council 
of  the  year  before,  the  prelates  of  the  Donatists  had  been  urged  by  the  municipal  author- 
ity to  assemble,  in  order  that  if  they  really  meant  their  professions,  they  might  by  fit 
persons  chosen  from  their  number,  enter  into  a  peaceful  conference  with  us  in  Christian 
meekness,  and  whatever  they  held  as  truth  they  might  not  hesitate  to  declare  it  frankly ; 
so  that  from  such  conference  the  sincerity  of  the  Catholic  position,  which  has  been  con- 
spicuous for  so  long  a  time,  might  be  perceived  even  by  those  who  from  ignorance  or 
obstinacy  were  opposing  themselves  to  it.  But  deterred  by  their  want  of  confidence 
they  scarcely  ventured  to  reply.  And  forsooth,  because  we  had  discharged  toward 
them  the  offices  which  become  bishops  and  peacemakers,  and  they  had  no  answer  to 
make  to  the  truth,  they  betook  themselves  to  unreasonable  acts  of  brute  force,  and 
treacherously  oppressed  many  of  the  bishops  and  clergy,  to  say  nothing  of  the  laity. 
And  some  of  the  churches  they  actually  invaded,  and  tried  to  assault  still  others. 

And  now,  it  behoves  the  gracious  clemency  of  their  Majesties  to  take  measures  that 
the  Catholic  Church,  which  has  begotten  them  as  worshippers  of  Christ  in  her  womb, 
and  has  nourished  them  with  the  strong  meat  of  the  faith,  should  by  their  forethought, 
be  defended,  lest  violent  men,  taking  advantage  of  the  times  of  religious  excitement, 
should  by  fear  overcome  a  weak  people,  whom  by  argument  they  were  not  able  to  per- 
vert. It  is  well  known  how  often  the  vile  gatherings  (dctestabilis  mantis)  of  the  Cir- 
cumcelliones  *  have  been  forbidden  by  the  laws,  and  also  condemned  by  many  decrees  of 
the  Emperors,  their  majesties  most  religious  predecessors.  Against  the  madness  of 
these  people  it  is  not  unusual  nor  contrary  to  the  holy  Scriptures  to  ask  for  secular 
[$et'a?  in  the  Greek]  protection,  since  Paul  the  Apostle,  as  is  related  in  the  authentic  Acts 
of  the  Apostles,  warded  off  a  conspiracy  of  certain  lawless  men  by  the  help  of  the  mili- 

•  Vide  Kraus.    Real.  Encyclopaedic. 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419  489 

tary.  Now  then  we  ask  that  there  be  extended  to  the  Catholic  Churches,  without  any 
dissimulation,  the  protection  of  the  ordinum  [i.e.  companies  of  soldiers,  stationed]  in  each 
city,  and  of  the  holders  of  the  suburban  estates  in  the  various  places.1  At  the  same 
time  it  will  be  necessary  to  ask  that  they  give  commandment  that  the  law,  set  forth  by 
their  father  Theodosius,  of  pious  memory,  which  imposed  a  fine  of  ten  pounds  of  gold 
upon  both  the  ordainers  and  the  ordained  amoug  heretics,  and  which  was  also  directed 
against  proprietors  at  whose  houses  conventicles  were  held,  be  confirmed  anew  ;  so 
that  it  may  be  effective  with  persons  of  this  sort  when  Catholics,  provoked  by  their 
wiles,  shall  lay  complaint  against  them  ;  so  that  through  fear  at  least,  they  may  cease 
from  making  schisms  and  from  the  wickedness  of  the  heretics,  since  they  refuse  to  be 
cleansed  and  corrected  by  the  thought  of  the  eternal  punishment. 

Let  request  be  also  made  that  the  law  depriving  heretics  of  the  power  of  being  able 
to  receive  or  bequeath  by  gift  or  by  will,  be  straightway  renewed  by  their  Piety,  so  that 
all  right  of  giving  or  receiving  may  be  taken  away  from  those  who,  blinded  by  the  mad- 
ness of  obstinacy,  are  determined  to  continue  in  the  error  of  the  Donatists. 

With  regard  to  those  who  by  considerations  of  unity  and  peace  are  willing  to  cor- 
rect themselves,  let  permission  be  granted  to  them  to  receive  their  inheritance,  the  law 
notwithstanding,  even  though  the  bequest  by  gift  or  inheritance  was  made  while  they 
were  yet  living  in  the  error  of  the  heretics  ;  those  of  course  being  excepted,  who  under 
the  stress  of  legal  proceedings  have  sought  to  enter  the  Catholic  Church ;  for  it  may 
well  be  supposed,  that  persons  of  this  latter  sort  desired  Catholic  unity,  not  so  much 
from  fear  of  the  judgment  of  heaven,  as  from  the  greed  of  earthly  gain. 

For  the  furtherance  of  all  these  things  the  help  of  the  Powers  (Potestatum)  of  each 
one  of  the  provinces  is  needed.  With  regard  to  other  matters,  whatever  they  shall  per- 
ceive is  for  the  Church's  interests,  this  we  have  resolved  that  the  legation  have  full  au- 
thority to  do  and  to  carry  into  effect.  Moreover  it  seemed  good  to  us  all,  that  letters 
from  our  assembly  should  be  sent  to  the  most  glorious  Emperors  and  most  Excellent 
Worthinesses,  whereby  they  may  be  assured  of  the  agreement  of  us  all  that  the  legates 
should  be  sent  by  us  to  their  most  blessed  court. 

Since  it  is  a  very  slow  business  for  us  all  to  set  our  names  to  these  letters,  and  in 
order  that  they  may  not  be  burdened  with  the  signature  of  each  one  of  us,  we  desire 
thee,  brother  Aurelius,  that  thy  charity  be  good  enough  to  sign  them  in  the  name  of  us 
till.     And  to  this  they  all  agreed. 

I,  Aurelius,  Bishop  of  the  Church  of  Carthage  have  consented  to  this  decree  and 
have  subscribed  my  name.     And  so  all  the  other  bishops  subscribed. 

Letters  ought  likewise  to  be  sent  to  the  judges  that,  until  the  lord  permit  the  legates 
to  return  to  us,  they  give  protection  through  the  soldiers  of  the  cities,  and  through  the 
holders  of  the  farms  of  the  Catholic  Church.  It  ought  also  to  be  added  concerning  the 
dishonest  Equitius,  which  he  had  shewn  by  laying  claim  to  the  jus  sacerdotum,  that  he  be 
rejected  from  the  diocese  of  Hippo  according  to  the  statutes  of  the  Emperors.  Letters 
ought  also  to  be  sent  to  the  Bishop  of  the  Church  of  Borne  in  commendation  of  the 
legates,  and  to  the  other  Bishops  who  may  be  where  the  Emperor  is.  To  this  they 
assented. 

Likewise  I,  Aurelius,  Bishop  of  the  Church  of  Carthage,  have  consented  to  this  de- 
cree, and  having  read  it,  have  set  my  name  to  it. 

And  all  the  other  bishops  likewise  subscribed. 

NOTES, 


Ancient  Epitome  oe  Canon  XCIII. 
The  Emperors  who  were  horn  in  the  true  re- 
ligion and  were  educated  in  the  faith,  ought  to 


stretch  forth  a  helping  hand  to  the  Churches. 
For  the  military  band  overthrew  the  dire  conspir- 
acy which  was  threatening  Paul. 


The  text  is  corrupt  and  the  Greek  and  Latin  do  not  agree  in  mauy  places. 


490 


A'FKICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


Here  follows  a  brief  declaration  of  what  things  were  decreed  in  this  Synod. 

When  Stilico  a  second  time  and  Anthemius,  those  illustrious  men,  were  consuls,  on 
the  tenth  before  the  calends  of  September,  at  Carthage  in  the  basilica  of  the  second 
region.  I  have  not  written  out  in  full  the  acts  of  this  council :  because  they  treat  of 
the  necessities  of  the  time  rather  than  of  matters  of  general  interest,  but  for  the  instruc- 
tion of  the  studious  I  have  added  a  brief  digest  of  the  same  council.2 

CANON  XCIY.     (Greek  xcvii.) 
Summary  of  Gha/pters. 

That  a  free  delegation  be  sent  to  the  council  from  all  the  provinces  to  Mizoneum. 
Legates  3  and  letters  were  ordered  to  be  sent  for  the  purpose  of  directing  the  free 
legation  :  that  became  the  unity  had  been  made  only  at  Carthage,  letters  should  also  be 
given  to  the  judges,  that  they  might  order  in  the  other  provinces  and  cities  the  work  of 
union  to  be  proceeded  with,  and  the  thanksgivings  of  the  Church  of  Carthage  for  the 
whole  of  Africa  concerning  the  exclusion  of  the  Donatists  should  be  sent  with  the  let- 
ters of  the  bishops  to  Court  {ad  Comitatum). 

The  letters  of  Pope  Innocent  were  read :  that  bishops  ought  not  readily  to  carry 
causes  across  seas,  and  this  very  thing  was  confirmed  by  the  judgment  of  the  bishops 
themselves ;  that  on  account  of  thanksgiving  and  the  exclusion  of  the  Donatists,  two 
clerics  of  the  Church  of  Carthage  should  be  sent  to  Court. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XCIV. 

It  seemed  good  that  letters  be   sent   to 
Magistrates  that  the  Donatists  be  expelled.* 


NOTES. 

This  introduction  is  taken  from  the  Synod 
,  of  Carthage  of  August  23,  405.     There  is  also 
the  added  the  introduction  of  the  Synod  of  Car- 
thage of  June  13,  407. 


In  this  synod  certain  things  already  decreed  are  corrected. 

Under  the  most  illustrious  emperors  Honorius  for  the  Vllth  time,  and  Theodosius 
for  the  second  time,  the  consuls  being  the  Augusti,  on  the  Ides  of  July  in  Carthage  in 
the  basilica  of  the  second  region,  Avhen  bishop  Aurelius  together  with  his  other  bishops 
had  taken  his  seat,  and  while  the  deacons  stood  by,  he  said:  Since  it  was  decreed 
in  the  council  of  Hippo,  that  each  year  there  should  assemble  a  plenary  council  of 
Africa,  not  only  here  in  Carthage  but  also  in  the  different  provinces  in  their  order,  and 
this  was  reserved  that  we  should  determine  its  place  of  meeting  sometimes  in  Numidia 
and  sometimes  in  Byzacium.     But  this  seemed  laborious  to  all  the  brethren. 


CANON  XCV.    (Greek  xcviii.) 

An  universal  council  to  he  held  only  when  necessary. 

It  seemed  good  that  there  should  be  no  more  the  yearly  necessity  of  fatiguing  the 
brethren ;  but  as  often  as  common  cause,  that  is  of  the  whole  of  Africa,  demands,  that 
letters  shall  be  given  on  every  side  to  that  see  in  this  matter,  that  a  synod  should  be 
gathered  in  that  province,  where  the  desirability  of  it  induces ;  but  let  the  causes  which 
are  not  of  general  interest  be  judged  in  their  own  provinces. 


1  In  the  Greek,  "The  acts  of:  the  present  synod  have  not  been 
written  ont  here  in  full,  etc." 

2  The  Greek  text  here  is  much  to  be  preferred,  "wherefore  a 


brief  synopsis  of  what  was  studiously  enacted  in  this  synod  is 
here  set  forth." 

3  The  Latin  text  here  is  certainly  corrupt. 

4  This  is  placed  by  Beveridge  under  Greek  canon  xcviij. 


AFKICAN  CODE.     A.D.  419  491 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XCV.  This  canon  is  Canon  j.  of  the  Synod  of 

Carthage,  a.d.  407. 


Wlwn  general  necessity  so  urges,  letters  arc  to 
he  sent  to  the  chief  see,  and  a  synod  held  in  a 
convenient  place.  But  let  ordinary  causes  be 
settled  in  their  oivn  provinces. 


Johnson. 
This   canon  is   a  tacit   revocation   of  that 
clause  for  annual  synods  in  the  18th  canon, 
which  was  made  in  a  former  council. 


CANON  XCVI.     (Greek  xcix.) 

That  from  judges  who  have  been  chosen,  no  appeals  may  be  taken. 

If  an  appeal  be  taken,  let  liini  who  makes  it  choose  the  judges,  and  with  him  lie 
also  against  whom  the  appeal  is  taken ;  and  from  their  decision  no  appeal  may  be  made. 

Concerning  the  delegates  of  the  different  provinces. 

When  all  the  delegates  of  the  different  provinces  came  together,  they  have  been 
most  graciously  received,  that  is  those  of  the  Numidians,  Byzacenes,  Stifensian  Moors, 
as  well  as  Caesarians  and  Tripolitans. 

Concerning  the  executors  of  Churches. 

It  has  seemed  good  moreover  that  the  appointment  of  five  executors  should  be 
asked  for  in  all  matters  pertaining  to  the  necessities  of  the  Church,  who  shall  be  por- 
tioned off  in  the  different  provinces. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XCVI. 
If  one  party  to  a  suit  takes  an  appeal,  and  if 
both  choose  together  a  judge,  no  further  appeal 
shall  be  allowed. 


This  canon  is  Canon  ij.  of  Carthage,  a.d. 
407. 


CANON  XCVII.     (Greek  c.) 

That  there  be  sought  from  the  Emperor  the  protection  of  Advocates  in  causes  ecclesiastical. 

It  seemed  good  that  the  legates  who  were  about  leaving,  viz.,  Vincent  and  Fortu- 
natian,  should  in  the  name  of  all  the  provinces  ask  from  the  most  glorious  Emperors  to 
give  a  faculty  for  the  establishment  of  scholastic  defensors,  whose  shall  be  the  care  of 
this  very  kind  of  business  :  so  that  as  the  priests  x  of  the  province,  they  who  have  re- 
ceived the  faculty  as  defensors  of  the  Churches  in  ecclesiastical  affairs,  as  often  as 
necessity  arises,  may  be  able  to  enter  the  private  apartments  of  the  judges,  so  as  to  re- 
sist what  is  urged  on  the  other  side,  or  to  make  necessary  explanations. 


NOTES. 
Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  XCVII. 
That  there  be  asked  of  the  Emperor  the  ap 
pointment  of  Patrons  for  ecclesiastical  heads, 


whose  care  it  should  be  to  defend  the  Church  in 
its  affairs,  and  who  as  priests  could  easily  refer 
what  things  were  urgent. 


(Greek  ci.) 

That  the  legation  be  free. 

It  seemed  good  that  the  chosen  legates  should  have  at  the  meeting  freedom  of  action 
(legationem  liber  am). 

1  Mansi  notes  that  this  refers  to  the  heathen  priests,  and  quotes  Cod.  Theod.  47,  de  decurionibus. 


492 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


The  protest  of  the  Mauritanian  bishops  against  Primosus. 

It  is  evident  that  those  of  Mauritania  Ca)sariensis  gave  evidence  in  their  own  writ- 
ings that  Primosus  had  been  summoned  by  the  chiefs  of  the  Thiganensian  city,  that 
he  should  present  himself  to  the  plenary  council  according  to  the  imperial  constitutions, 
and,  when  sought  for,  as  was  right,  Primosus  was  not  found,  at  least  so  the  deacons  re- 
ported. But  since  the  same  Mauritanians  petitioned  that  letters  be  sent  from  the  whole 
synod  to  the  venerable  brother,  the  aged  Innocent,  it  seemed  good  that  they  should  be 
sent,  that  he  might  know  that  Primosus  had  been  sought  at  the  council  and  not  found 
at  all. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome. 
[Lacking.] 


Balsamon. 

The  contents  of  this  canon  being  special  are 
useless,  therefore  no  explanation  has  been 
given. 

This  Canon  is  Canon  iij.  of  Carthage,  a.d. 
407. 


Johnson. 

See  can.  75  (78)  and  note  on  Can.  Chalced., 
23. 

These  officers  [i.e.  "defensors"]  seem  to  be 
called  "executores  "  in  the  acts  of  synod  just 
before  this  canon. 

The  "priest  of  the  province"  was  one 
chosen  out  of  the  body  of  advocates  to  be 
counsel  to  the  province,  to  act  and  plead  in 
their  behalf ;  and  that  he  might  do  it  more 
effectually  he  was  allowed  to  have  private 
conference  with  the  judge. 


CANON  XCVIII.    (Greek  cii.) 
Of  the  peoples  which  never  had  bishops. 

It  seemed  good  that  such  peoples  as  had  never  had  bishops  of  their  own  should  in 
no  way  receive  such  unless  it  had  been  decreed  in  a  plenary  council  of  each  province 
and  by  the  primates,  and  with  the  consent  of  the  bishop  of  that  diocese  to  which  the 
church  belonged. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XCVIII. 

Whoso  never  heretofore  had  a  bishop  of  their 

own,  unless  the  general  synod  of  the  Province 

shall  agree  to  it,  and  the  Primate,  in  agreement 

with,  him  to  whom  the  province  in  ivhich  the 


Church  is,  is  subject,  shall  not  have  bisho2)s  of 
their  own. 

This  canon  is  Canon  iv.  of  the  Synod  of 
Carthage,  a.d.  407. 


CANON  XCIX.     (Greek  ciii.) 

Of  people  or  dioceses  returned  from  the  Donatists. 

Such  communities  as  have  returned  from  the  Donatists  and  have  had  bishops,  with- 
out doubt  may  continue  to  have  them  even  without  any  action  of  the  councils,  but  such 
a  community  as  had  a  bishop  and  when  he  dies  wish  no  longer  to  have  a  bishop  of  their 
own,  but  to  belong  to  the  diocese  of  some  other  bishop,  this  is  not  to  be  denied  them. 
Also  such  bishops  as  before  the  promulgation  of  the  imperial  law  concerning  unity  as 
brought  back  their  people  to  the  Catholic  Church,  they  ought  to  be  allowed  still  to  rule 
them  :  but  from  the  time  of  that  law  of  unity,  all  the  Churches,  and  their  dioceses,  and  if 
perchance  there  be  any  instruments  of  the  Church  or  things  pertaining  to  its  rights 
should  belong  to  the  Catholic  bishops  of  those  places  to  whom  the  places  pertained 
while  under  the  heretics,  whether  they  be  converted  to  the  Catholic  Church  or  remain 
unconverted  heretics.  Whoever  after  this  law  shall  make  any  such  usurpation,  shall 
restore  as  is  meet  the  usurped  possessions. 


AFKICAN  CODE.     A.D.  419 


493 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XCIX. 
IVJioever  are  converted  from  the  Donatists  may 
retain  their  own  bishops,  although  they  had  them 
without  the  consent  of  the  synod ;  and  when  the 
bishop  is  dead,  if  they  do  not  loish  another  to  be 
substituted  in  his  room,  but  desire  to  pi 'ace  them- 
selves tinder  some  other  bishop,  they  shall  be  al- 
lowed to  do  so.  And  such  bishops  as  before  the 
union  have  brought  back  the  people  they  ruled,  let 


them  still  rule  them.     After  the  imperial  Edict  on 
Unity  every  church  must  defend  its  own  rights. 

This  canon  is  Canon  v.  of  Carthage,  a.d. 
407. 

Johnson. 

"An  imperial  law  concerning  unity"  i.e. 
For  uniting  all  in  the  catholic  faith,  and 
ejecting  the  donatistical  bishops. 


CANON  C.     (Greek  civ.) 
Of  the  suggestion  of  Bishop  Maurentius. 

[Hefele  says  "  The  text  of  this  canon  is  much  corrupted  and  very  dijficxdt  to  he  wider- 
stood."  He  gives  as  a  synopsis,  "  The  council  appoints  judges  in  the  affair  of  Bishop 
Maurentius"     (Hefele,  Vol.  II.,  p.  443.)] 

Johnson  thus  condenses  and  translates. 

Bishop  Maurentius  having  an  information  against  him,  lying  before  the  council, 
moves  for  a  hearing ;  but  the  informers  don't  appear  upon  three  calls  made  by  the 
deacons  on  the  day  appointed.  The  cause  is  referred  to  Senex  Xantippus,  Augus- 
tinus,  and  five  more  summoned  by  the  council,  the  informers  were  to  make  up  the 
number  twelve. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  C. 
It  is  right  that  sentence  be  given  on  the  subdea- 
cons  tvho  are  said  to  be  present  from  Nova  Ger- 
mania,  who  have  thrice  been  sought  and  not  found. 
But  oid  of  regard  to  ecclesiastical  gentleness,  let 
some  be  sent  to  loolc  into  the  matter. 

Balsamon. 
The  contents  of  this  canon  are  of  a  private 


character,  and  therefore  have  not  been  com- 
mented on. 

This  canon  is  Canon  vj.  of  Carthage,  a.d. 
407. 

Johnson. 

"Senes  "  i.e.  Primate  Xantippus,  as  is  com- 
monly believed.  He  and  others  have  this 
title  frequently  given  them  in  the  acts  of  these 
councils.     See  can.  8. 


CANON   CI.     (Greek  civ.  Us) 

Of  making  peace  between  the  Churches  of  Rome  and  Alexandria. 

It  seemed  good  that  a  letter  be  written  to  the  holy  Pope  Innocent  concerning  the 
dissension  between  the  Churches  of  Piome  and  Alexandria,  so  that  each  Church  might 
keep  peace  with  the  other  as  the  Lord  commanded. 

NOTES. 
Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CI.  This  canon   is  Canon  vij.  of  Carthage,  a,d. 

It  seemed  good  to  write  to  Innocent  that  the  407. 
Roman  and  Alexandrian  churches  might  beat] 
peace  between  themselves. 

CANON  CII.     (Greek  cv.) 

Of  those  xoho  put  away  their  wives  or  htisbands,  that  so  they  remain. 

It  seemed  good  that  according  to  evangelical  and  apostolical  discipline  a  man  who 
had  been  put  away  from  his  wife,  and  a  woman  put  away  from  her  husband  should  not 
be  married  to  another,  but  so  should  remain,  or  else  be  reconciled  the  one  to  the  other ; 


494  AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 

but  if  they  spurn  this  law,  they  shall  be  forced  to  do  penance,  covering  which  case  we 
must  petition  that  an  imperial  law  be  promulgated. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CIT.  This  canon  is  Canon  viij.  of  Carthage,  a.d. 


Married  people  tvho  are  hosed  must  remain 
unmarried  or  else  be  reconciled,  otherwise  they 
shall  be  forced  to  do  penance. 


407,  and  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris  Can- 
onici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  P.  II.,  Causa  xxxij., 
Qusest.  vij.,  can.  v. 


CANON  Cin.    (Greek  cvi.) 

Of  the  prayers  to  he  said  at  the  Altar. 

This  also  seemed  good,  that  the  prayers  which  had  been  approved  in  synod  should 
be  used  by  all,  whether  prefaces,  commendations,  or  laying  on  of  the  hand,  and  that 
others  contrary  to  the  faith  should  not  be  used  by  any  means,  but  that  those  only 
should  be  said  which  had  been  collected  by  the  learned. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CIII.  I  time  or  occasion,  as  our  Church  uses  in  her 


[The  same  as  the  canon,  but  omits  the  last 
phrase.] 

This  canon  is  Canon  ix.  of  Carthage,  a.d. 
407. 

Johnson. 

That  is,  such  forms  fitted  for  the  present 


Communion  Office  before  the  trisagium,  on 
Christmas,  Easter,  etc.  These  prefaces  were 
very  ancient  in  the  Christian  church.  Pray- 
ers used  to  recommend  the  catechumens, 
penitents,  and  dying  souls  to  God's  protec- 
tion were  styled  "  Commendations." 


CANON  CIV.     (Greek  cvii.) 

Of  these  who  askfrom  the  Emperor  that  secular  judges  may  take  cognizance  of  their 
causes. 

It  seemed  good  that  whoever  should  seek  from  the  Emperor,  that  secular  judges 
should  take  cognizance  of  his  business,  should  be  deprived  of  his  office  ;  if  however,  he 
had  asked  from  the  Emperor  an  episcopal  trial,  no  objection  should  be  made. 


NOTES 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CIV. 


Let  not  him  be  a  bishop  who  from  the  Em- 
peror seel's  a  public  judgment. 


This   canon  is  Canon  X.  of  Carthage,  a.d. 
407. 

Johnson. 

See  Canon  Ant,,  12. 


CANON  CV.    (Greek  cviii.) 

Of  those  who  do  not  communicate  in  Africa  and  would  go  across  seas. 

Whoever  does  not  communicate  in  Africa,  and  goes  to  communicate  across  seas,  let 
him  be  cast  out  of  the  clergy. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CV. 
Wlioever  is  cut  off  from  communion  in  Africa, 
and  goes  to  parts  across  seas  that  he  may  there 
communicate,  is  to  be  cast  out  of  the  clergy. 


This  canon  is  Canon  j.  of   Carthage,  a.d. 
407. 


AFRICAN  CODE.    A.D.  419 


495 


CANON  CVI.     (Greek  cix.) 

That  those  who  are  going  to  carry  their  case  to  court  should  he  careful  to  inform 
either  the  bishop  of  Carthage  or  *  the  bishop  of  Home. 

It  seemed  good  that  whoever  wished  to  go  to  court,  should  give  notice  in  the  form 
which  is  sent  to  the  Church  of  the  city  of  Borne,  that  from  thence  also  he  should  re- 
ceive a  formed  letter  to  court.  But  if  receiving  only  a  formed  letter  to  Eome,  and  say- 
ing nothing  about  the  necessity  which  he  had  of  going  to  court,  he  willed  immediately 
to  go  thither,  let  him  be  cut  off  from  communion.  But  if  while  at  Borne  the  necessity 
of  going  to  court  suddenly  arose,  let  him  state  his  necessity  to  the  bishop  of  Borne  and 
let  him  carry  with  him  a  rescript  of  the  same  Boman  bishop.  But  let  the  formed  let- 
ters which  are  issued  by  primates  and  by  certain  bishops  to  their  own  clergy  have  the 
date  of  Easter ;  but  if  it  be  yet  uncertain  what  is  the  date  of  Easter  of  that  year,  let  the 
preceding  Easter's  date  be  set  down,  as  it  is  customary  to  date  public  acts  after  the  con- 
sulship. 

It  further  seemed  good  that  those  who  were  sent  as  delegates  from  this  glorious  coun- 
cil should  ask  of  the  most  glorious  princes  whatever  they  saw  would  be  useful  against 
the  Donatists  and  Pagans,  and  their  superstitions. 

It  also  seemed  good  to  all  the  bishops  that  all  conciliar  letters  be  signed  by  your 
holiness  alone.  And  they  subscribed  :  I,  Aurelius,  Bishop  of  Carthage,  have  consented 
to  this  decree,  and  having  read  it,  now  subscribe  my  name.  Likewise  also  the  rest  of 
the  bishops  subscribed. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CVI. 

Whoever  from  any  necessity  was  going  to 
court,  must  declare  his  intention  to  the  bishop  of 
Carthage  and  to  the  bishop  of  Home,  and  receive 


a  letter  dimissory,  and  otherwise  he  shall  be  ex- 
communicated. 

Whatever  shall  seem  to  the  legates  useful  against 
the  Donatists  and  Greeks,  and  their  superstitions, 
that  shall  be  sought  from  the  Emperor. 


(Greek  ex.) 

Synod  against  the  pagans  and  heretics. 

In  the  consulship  of  those  most  illustrious  men  Bassus  and  Philip,  the  xvith  Calends 
of  July,  at  Carthage,  in  the  secretarium  of  the  restored  basilica.'"  In  this  council  the 
bishop  Fortimatian  received  a  second  appointment  as  legate  against  the  pagans  and 
heretics. 

Item,  a  council  against  the  pagans  and  heretics. 

In  the  consulship  of  those  most  illustrious  men  Bassus  and  Philip,  the  iii.  Ides  of 
October  at  Carthage,  in  the  Secretarium  of  the  restored  basilica "::".  In  this  council  the 
bishops  Bestitutus  and  Florentius  received  a  legation  against  the  pagans  and  here- 
tics, at  the  time  Severus  and  Macarius  were  slain,  and  on  their  account  the  bishops 
Euodius,  Theasius  and  Victor  were  put  to  death. 


NOTES. 


This  canon  is  Canon  xij.  of  Carthage,  a.d. 
407. 


Johnson. 
Of  "  Formal  Letters  "  see  Can.  Ap.,  10  (13). 


CANON  CVII.     (Greek  ex.  continued.) 

A  Council  concerning  a  bishop  talcing  cognizance. 

In  the  consulate  of  the  most  glorious  Emperors  Honorius  for  the  Vllth  time  and 
Theodosiusfor  the  Hid,  Augusti,  xvii.  Calends  of  July,  a  synod  was  held  at  Carthage 
in  the  basilica  of  the  second  region.     In  this  council  it  seemed  good  that  no  one  bishop 


"  And  "  in  the  Greek,  which  omits  the  preceding  "either." 


'  Between  these  asterisks  all  is  missing  in  the  Greek. 


496 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


should  claim  the  right  to  take  cognizance  of  a  cause.     The  acts  of  this  council  I  have 
not  here  written  down,  because  it  Avas  only  provincial  and  not  general, 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CVII. 
One  bishop  shall  not  claim  for  himself  to  take  cognizance  of  a  cause  alone. 

(Greek  cxi.) 

Synod  against  the  Donatists. 

After  the  consulate  of  the  most  illustrious  Emperors  Honorius  for  the  Vlllth  time 
and  Theodosius  for  the  IVth  time,  Augusti,  xviii.  Calends  of  July,  at  Carthage  in  the 
basilica  of  the  second  region.  In  this  council  the  bishops,  Florentius,  Possidius, 
Prsesidius  and  Benenatus  received  legation  against  the  Donatists,  at  that  time  at  which 
a  law  was  given  that  anyone  might  practice  the  Christian  worship  at  his  own  will. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CVII. 
Let  each  one  receive  the  practice  of  jyiety  of  his 
own  free  will. 


NOTES. 

which  follows  it  are  the  introductions  to  the 
Synods  of  Carthage  of  June  15,  a.d.  409,  and 
of  June  14,  a.d.  410. 


The  two  first  introductions  belong  respec- 
tively to  the  Synods  of  Carthage  of  June  16 
and  of  October  13,  a.d.  408. 

Canon  cvij.  of  the  African  code  and  that 


Johnson. 
See  can.  10,  11,  12,  28  (31),  79  (80).     Rec- 
ognises, a  law  of  the  Empire,  that  everyone 
receive  Christianity  at  his  own  free  choice. 


CANON   CVIII.     (Greek  cxii.) 

/Synod  against  the  heresy  of'Pelagius  and  Celestius. 

In  the  consulate  of  the  most  glorious  Emperors,  Honorius  for  the  XHth  time  and 
Theodosius  for  the  Vlllth,  Augusti  most  exalted,  on  the  Calends  of  May,  at  Carthage 
in  the  secretarium  of  the  Basilica  of  Faustus.  When  Aurelius  the  bishop  presided  over 
the  whole  council,  the  deacons  standing  by,  it  pleased  all  the  bishops,  whose  names  and 
subscriptions  are  indicated,1  met  together  in  the  holy  synoc1  of  the  Church  of  Carthage 
to  define — 2 

CANON  CIX.     (Greek  cxij.  continued.) 

That  Adam  toas  not  created  by  God  subject  to  death. 

That  whosoever  says  that  Adam,  the  first  man,  was  created  mortal,  so  that  whether 
he  had  sinned  or  not,  he  would  have  died  in  body — that  is,  he  would  have  gone  forth 
of  the  body,  not  because  his  sin  merited  this,  but  by  natural  necessity,  let  him  be 
anathema. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CIX. 
Whoso  shall  assert  that  the  protoplast  would 
have  died  without  sin  and  through  natural  ne- 
cessity, let  him  be  anathema. 


Canon  CVIII.  is  the  introduction  to  the 
Synod  of  Carthage  of  May  1,  a.d.  418;  and 
Canon  CIX.  is  Canon  j.  of  that  synod. 


CANON   CX.  (Greek  cxii.  bis) 

That  infants  are  baptized  for  the  remission  of  sins. 

Likewise  it  seemed  good  that  whosoever  denies  that  infants  newly  from  their 
mother's  wombs  should  be  baptized,  or  says  that  baptism  is  for  remission  of  sins,  but 
that  they  derive  from  Adam  no  original  sin,  which  needs  to  be  removed  by  the  laver  of 


i  The  Latin  here  is  corrupt. 


•  Here  begins  Canon  CIX.  of  the  Latin  test. 


AFRICAN  CODE.     A.D.  419  497 

regeneration,  from  whence  the  conclusion  follows,  that  in  them  the  form  of  baptism  for 
the  remission  of  sins,  is  to  be  understood  as  false  and  not  true,  let  him  be  anathema. 

For  no  otherwise  can  be  understood  what  the  Apostle  says,  "  By  one  man  sin  is  come 
into  the  world,  and  death  through  sin,  and  so  death  passed  upon  all  men  in  that  all  have 
"  sinned,"  than  the  Catholic  Church  everywhere  diffused  has  always  understood  it.  For 
on  account  of  this  rule  of  faith  (regulam  ficlei)  even  infants,  who  could  have  committed 
as  yet  no  sin  themselves,  therefore  are  truly  baptized  for  the  remission  of  sins,  in  order 
that  what  in  them  is  the  result  of  generation  may  be  cleansed  by  regeneration. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CX. 
Whoso  affirms  that  those  newly  bom  and  bap- 
tised contract  nothing  from  Adam's  transgression, 
which  needs  to  be  washed  away  by  baptism,  is  to 
be  execrated:  for  through  one  both  death  and  sin 
invaded  the  whole  world. 


This    is   Canon  ij.   of  Carthage,  a.d.   418 
[Greek  Canon  112]. 

Johnson. 
See  Can.  63,  104,  both  which  are  double, 
as  this  likewise  is  in  the  old  Greek  scholiasts. 


[Also  it  seemed  good,  that  if  anyone  should  say  that  the  saying  of  the  Lord,  "  In  my 
Father's  house  are  many  mansions  "  is  to  be  understood  as  meaning  that  in  the  kingdom 
of  heaven  there  will  be  a  certain  middle  place,  or  some  place  somewhere,  in  which  in- 
fants live  in  happiness  who  have  gone  forth  from  this  life  without  baptism,  without  which 
they  cannot  enter  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  which  is  eternal  life,  let  him  be  anathema. 
For  after  our  Lord  has  said :  "  Except  a  man  be  born  again  of  water  and  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  he  shall  not  enter  the  kingdom  of  heaven,"  what  Catholic  can  doubt  that  he  who 
has  not  merited  to  be  coheir  with  Christ  shall  become  a  sharer  with  the  devil :  for  he 
who  fails  of  the  right  hand  without  doubt  shall  receive  the  left  hand  portion.] 

NOTES. 

The  foregoing,  says  Surius,  is  found  in  this  I  occur  in  the  Greek,  nor  in  Dionysius.     Brans 
place  in  a  very  ancient  codex.     It  does  not  |  relegates  it  to  a  foot-note. 

CANON  CXI.     (Greek  cxiij.) 

That  the  grace  of  God  not  only  gives  remission  of  sins,  hut  also  affords  aid  that  we 
sin  no  more. 

Likewise  it  seemed  good,  that  whoever  should  say  that  the  grace  of  God,  by  which 
a  man  is  justified  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord,  avails  only  for  the  remission  of  past 
sins,  and  not  for  assistance  against  committing  sins  in  the  future,  let  him  be  anathema. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CXI, 
Whoever  is  of  opinion  that  the  grace  of  God 


only  gives  remission  of  those  sins  we  have  already 
committed,  and  docs  not  afford  aid  against  sin  in 
the  future,  is  to  be  twice  execrated. 


CANON   CXII.     (Greek  cxiij.  continued.) 

That  the  grace  of  Christ  gives  not  only  the  knoioledge  of  our  duty,  but  also  inspires 
us  with  a  desire  that  we  may  be  able  to  accomjjlish  what  we  knovi. 

Also,  whoever  shall  say  that  the  same  grace  of  God  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord 
helps  us  only  in  not  sinning  by  revealing  to  us  and  opening  to  our  understanding  the 
commandments,  so  that  we  may  know  what  to  seek,  what  we  ought  to  avoid,  and  also 
that  we  should  love  to  do  so,  but  that  through  it  we  are  not  helped  so  that  we  are  able 
to  do  what  we  know  we  should  do,  let  him  be  anathema.  For  when  the  Apostle  says  : 
"  Wisdom  puffeth  up,  but  charity  edifieth  "  it  were  truly  infamous  were  we  to  believe 

VOL.    XIV.  K  k 


498 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


that  we  liave  the  grace  of  Christ  for  that  which  puffeth  us  up,  but  have  it  not  for  that 
which  edifieth,  since  in  each  case  it  is  the  gift  of  God,  both  to  know  what  we  ought  to 
do,  and  to  love  to  do  it ;  so  that  wisdom  cannot  puff  us  up  while  charity  is  edifying  us. 
For  as  of  God  it  is  written,  "  Who  teacheth  man  knowledge,"  so  also  it  is  written,  "Love 
is  of  God." 

NOTES, 


Canon  cxi.  is  Canon  iij.  of  Carthage,  a.d. 
418,  and  Canon  cxii.  is  Canon  iv.  of  the  same 
synod. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CXII. 
Whoever  says  that  the  grace  of  Ood  is  given 
to  us  only  that  we  may  know  what  we  ought  to 
do  and  what  to  flee  from,  bat  not  also  that  we 
may  love  the  thing  known,  and  be  able  to  accom- 
plish it,  let  him  be  anathema. 

CANON   CXIII.     (Greek  cxiiii.) 
That  without  the  grace  of  God  we  can  do  no  good  thing. 

It  seemed  good  that  whosoever  should  say  that  the  grace  of  justification  was  given 
to  ns  only  that  we  might  be  able  more  readily  by  grace  to  perform  what  we  were  ordered 
to  do  through  our  free  will ;  as  if  though  grace  was  not  given,  although  not  easily,  yet 
nevertheless  we  could  even  without  grace  fulfil  the  divine  commandments,  let  him  be 
anathema.  For  the  Lord  spake  concerning  the  fruits  of  the  commandments,  when  he 
said  :  "  Without  me  ye  can  do  nothing,"  and  not  "  Without  me  ye  could  do  it  but  with 
difficulty." 

NOTES. 
Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CXIII.  I  difficulty,  is  to  be  thrice  execrated.    For  the  Lord 

IVIioso   preaches    that     without    grace     we\ says,  "  Without  me  ye  can  do  nothing." 
could   keep  the   commandments  although  with  \     This  is  Canon  V.  of  Carthage,  a.d.  418. 


CANON  CXIV.     (Greek  cxv.) 

That  not  only  humble  bid  also  true  is  that  voice  of  the  Saints :  "  If  we  say  that  we 
have  no  sin  we  deceive  ourselves? 

It  also  seemed  good  that  as  St.  John  the  Apostle  says,  "  If  we  shall  say  that  we 
have  no  sin  we  deceive  ourselves  and  the  truth  is  not  in  us,"  whosoever  thinks  that  this 
should  be  so  understood  as  to  mean  that  out  of  humility,  we  ought  to  say  that  we  have  sin, 
and  not  because  it  is  really  so,  let  him  be  anathema.  For  the  Apostle  goes  on  to  add, 
"  But  if  we  confess  our  sins,  he  is  faithful  and  just  to  forgive  us  our  sins  and  to  cleanse 
us  from  all  iniquity,"  where  it  is  sufficiently  clear  that  this  is  said  not  only  of  humility 
but  also  truly.  For  the  Apostle  might  have  said,  "If  we  shall  say  we  have  no  sins  we 
shall  extoll  ourselves,  and  humility  shall  have  no  place  in  us ; "  but  when  he  says,  "  we 
deceive  ourselves  and  the  truth  is  not  in  us  "  he  sufficiently  intimates  that  he  who 
affirmed  that  he  had  no  sin  would  speak  not  that  which  is  true  but  that  which  is  false. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CXIV. 
Wliosoever  shall  interpret  the  saying  of  the 
Divine  [i.e.  St.  John]  :  "  If 'we  shall  say  that  we 
have  no  sin,  we  deceive  ourselves  "  as  not  being 


realty  true  but  as  spoken  oxd  of  humility,  let  him 
be  anathema. 

This  is  Canon  vj.  of  Carthage,  a.d.  418. 


CANON  CXV.     (Greek  cxvi.) 

That  in  the  Lord's  Prayer  the  Saints  say  for  themselves :    "Forgive  us  our  trespasses." 

It  has  seemed  good  that  whoever  should  say  that  when  in  the  Lord's  prayer,  the 
saints  say,  "  forgive  us  our  trespasses,"  they  sajr  this  not  for  themselves,  because  they 
have  no  need  of  this  petition,  but  for  the  rest  who  are  sinners  of  the  people ;  and  that 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


499 


therefore  no  one  of  the  saints  can  say,  "  Forgive  me  my  trespasses,"  but  "  Forgive  us 
our  trespasses ;  "  so  that  the  just  is  understood  to  seek  this  for  others  rather  than  for 
himself;  let  him  be  anathema.  For  holy  and  just  was  the  Apostle  James,  when  he 
said,  "For  in  many  things  we  offend  all."  For  why  was  it  added  "all,"  unless  that 
this  sentence  might  agree  also  with  the  psalm,  where  we  read,  "  Enter  not  into  judg- 
ment with  thy  servant,  O  Lord,  for  in  thy  sight  shall  no  man  living  be  justified ;  "  and 
in  the  prayer  of  the  most  wise  Solomon  :  "  There  is  no  man  that  sinneth  not ;  "  and 
in  the  book  of  the  holy  Job  :  "  He  sealeth  in  the  hand  of  every  man,  that  every  man 
may  knoAV  Lis  own  infirmity  ;  "  wherefore  even  the  holy  and  just  Daniel  when  in  prayer 
said  several  times :  "  We  have  sinned,  we  have  done  iniquity,"  and  other  things  which 
there  truly  and  humbly  he  confessed ;  nor  let  it  be  thought  (as  some  have  thought)  that 
this  was  said  not  of  his  own  but  rather  of  the  people's  sins,  for  he  said  further  on : 
"  When  I  shall  pray  and  confess  my  sins  and  the  sins  of  my  people  to  the  Lord  my 
God ;  "  he  did  not  wish  to  say  our  sins,  but  he  said  the  sins  of  his  people  and  his  own 
sins,  since  he  as  a  prophet  foresaw  that  those  who  were  to  come  would  thus  misunder- 
stand his  words. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CXV. 

~\Wwso  expounds  this,  "forgive  us  our  trcs- 
passes  "  as  speaking  only  of  the  multitude  and 
not  of  individuals  let  him  be  anathema :  Since 


Daniel  even  he  can  behold  saying  with,  the  multi- 
tude "I  confessed  my  sins  and  the  sins  of  my 
people." 

This  is  Canon  vij.  of  Carthage,  a.d.  418. 


CANON   CXVI.    (Greek  cxvii.) 

That  the  Saints  say  with  accuracy,  "  Forgive  us  our  trespasses." 

Likewise  also  it  seemed  good,  that  whoever  wished  that  these  words  of  the  Lord's 
prayer,  when  we  say,  "Forgive  us  our  trespasses  "  are  said  by  the  saints  out  of  humility 
and  not  in  truth  let  them  be  anathema.  For  who  would  make  a  lying  prayer,  not  to 
men  but  to  God  ?  Who  would  say  with  his  lips  that  he  wished  his  sins  forgiven  him, 
but  in  his  heart  that  he  had  no  sins  to  be  forgiven. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CXVI. 
(Lacking. ) 

CANON  CXVII. 


This  is  Canon  viij.  of  Carthage,  a.d.  418. 
(Greek  cxviii.) 


Of  peoples  converted  from  the  Donatists. 

Item,  it  seemed  good,  since  it  was  so  decreed  some  years  ago  by  a  plenary  council, 
that  whatever  churches  were  erected  in  a  diocese  before  the  laws  were  made  concerning 
Donatists  when  they  became  Catholic,  should  pertain  to  the  sees  of  those  bishops  through 
whom  their  return  to  Catholic  unity  was  brought  about ;  but  after  the  laws  whatever 
churches  communicated  were  to  belong  there  where  they  belonged  when  they  were  Dona- 
tists. But  because  Liany  controversies  afterward  arose  and  are  still  springing  up  between 
bishops  concerning  dioceses,  which  were  not  then  at  all  in  prospect,  now  it  has  seemed 
good  to  this  council,  that  wherever  there  was  a  Catholic  and  a  Donatist  party,  pertaining 
to  different  sees,  at  whatever  time  unity  has  been  or  shall  be  made,  whether  before  or 
after  the  laws,  the  churches  shall  belong  to  that  see  to  which  the  Catholic  church  which 
was  already  there  belonged. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CXVII. 

Whenever  conversions  and  unions  of  Donatists 
are  effected,  let  them  be  subject  to  that  throne  to 


which  the  Catholic  Church  which  was  formerly 
there  was  subject. 

This  is  Canon  ix.  of  Carthage,  a.d.  418. 


K  k  2 


500 


AFRICAN   CODE.    A.D.  419 


CANON  CXVIII.   (Greek  exix.) 

How  bishops  as  well  Catholic  as  those  who  have  been  converted  from  the  Donatists  are 
to  divide  betioeen  themselves  the  dioceses. 

So,  too,  it  has  seemed  good  that  if  a  bishop  has  been  converted  from  the  Donatists 
to  Catholic  unity,  that  equally  there  should  be  divided  what  shall  have  been  so  found 
where  there  were  two  parties  ;  that  is,  that  some  places  should  pertain  to  one  and  some 
to  the  other ;  and  let  the  division  be  made  by  him  who  has  been  the  longest  time  in  the 
episcopate,  and  let  the  younger  choose.  But  should  there  be  only  one  place  let  it  belong 
to  him  who  is  found  to  be  the  nearer.  But  should  the  distance  be  equal  to  each  of  the 
two  cathedrals  let  it  belong  to  the  one  the  people  may  choose.  But  shotdd  the  old  Catho- 
lics wish  their  own  bishop,  and  if  the  same  be  the  case  with  the  converted  Donatists,  let 
the  will  of  the  greater  number  prevail,  but  should  the  parties  be  equal,  let  it  belong  to 
him  who  has  been  longest  bishop.  But  if  so  many  places  be  found  in  which  there  were 
both  parties,  that  an  equal  division  is  impossible,  as  for  example,  if  they  are  unequal  in 
number,  after  those  places  have  been  distributed  which  have  an  equal  number,  the  place 
that  remains  over  shall  be  disposed  of  as  is  provided  above  in  the  case  where  there  is 
but  one  place  to  be  treated. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CXVIII. 

TJiose  who  have  been  converted  from  Donatus, 
let  them  divide  the  dioceses ;  and  let  the  senior 


bishop  make  the  division,  and  the  junior  choose 
lohicli  he  will. 

This  is  Canon  x.  of  Carthage,  a.d.  418. 


CANON   CXIX.     (Greek  cxx.) 

That  if  a  bishop  shall  possess  a  diocese  which  he  has  snatched  from  heresy  for  three 
years,  no  one  may  take  it  from  him. 

Item,  it  seemed  good  that  if  anyone  after  the  laws  should  convert  any  place  to  Catho- 
lic unity  and  retain  it  for  three  years  without  opposition,  it  should  not  be  taken  away 
from  him  afterwards.  If  however  there  was  during  those  three  years  a  bishop  who 
could  claim  it  and  was  silent,  he  shall  lose  the  opportunity.  But  if  there  was  no  bishop, 
no  prejudice  shall  happen  to  the  see,1  but  it  shall  be  lawful  when  the  place  that  had  none 
shall  receive  a  bishop,  to  make  the  claim  within  three  years  of  that  day.  Item,  if  a 
Donatist  bishop  shall  be  converted  to  the  Catholic  party,  the  time  that  has  elapsed  shall 
not  count  against  him,  but  from  the  day  of  his  conversion  for  three  years  he  shall  have 
the  right  of  making  a  claim  on  the  places  which  belonged  to  his  See. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CXIX. 


Whosoever  shall  convert  a  region  to  Orthodoxy 
and  shall  keep  it  converted  for  three  years,  let 
Mm  be  without  blame.   But  if  the  bishop  con  verted 


from  Donatus  tvithin  three  years  of  its  conver- 
sion seeks  his  diocese  again,  let  it  be  returned  to 

him  (et  evdya,  evayiro).) 

This  is  Canon  xj.  of  Carthage,  a.d.  418. 


CANON  CXX.    (Greek  exxi.) 

Of  those  who  intrude  upon  peoples  which  they  think  belong  to  them,  without  the  con- 
sent of  those  by  whom  they  are  held. 

Item,  it  seemed  good  that  whatever  bishops  seek  the  peoples  whom  they  consider  to 
pertain  to  their  see,  not  by  bringing  their  causes  before  the  episcopal  judges,  but  rush  in 
while  another  is  holding  the  place,  all  such,  (whether  said  people  are  willing  to  receive 


1  In  the  Latin  ,L  Matrici.': 


AFEICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419  501 

them  or  no)  shall  lose  their  case.  And  whoever  have  done  this,  if  the  contention 
between  the  two  bishops  is  not  yet  finished  but  still  going  on,  let  him  depart  who 
intruded  without  the  decree  of  the  ecclesiastical  judges ;  nor  let  anyone  flatter  himself 
that  he  will  retain  [what  he  has  seized]  if  he  shall  obtain  letters  from  the  primate,  but 
whether  he  has  such  letters  or  has  them  not,  it  is  suitable  that  he  who  holds  and 
receives  his  letters  should  make  it  appear  then  that  he  has  held  the  church  pertaining 
to  him  peaceably.  But  if  he  has  referred  any  question,  let  the  cause  be  decided  by  the 
episcopal  judges,  whether  those  whom  the  primates  have  appointed  for  them,  or  the 
neighbouring  bishops  whom  they  have  chosen  by  common  consent. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CXX.  j  whosoever  has  received  letters  from  the  primate 


Let  no  one  seize  for  himself  ivhat  he  thinks 
belongs  to  him:  but  let  the  bishops  judge  or 
tvhom  the  Primate  will  give,  or  whom  the  neigh- 
bouring bishops  shall  give  with  his  consent.    But 


concerning  the  keeping   [of  such    regions  and 
churches]  merely  deceives  himself. 

This  is  Canon  xij.  of  Carthage,  a.d.  418. 


CANON  CXXI.     (Greek  exxii.) 

Of  those  who  neglect  the  peoples  belonging  to  them. 

Item,  it  seemed  good  that  whoever  neglect  to  bring  the  places  belonging  to  their 
see  into  Catholic  unity  should  be  admonished  by  the  neighbouring  diligent  bishops, 
that  they  delay  no  longer  to  do  this ;  but  if  within  six  months  from  the  day  of  the  con- 
vention they  do  nothing,  let  them  pertain  to  him  who  can  win  them :  but  with  this 
proviso  however,  that  if  he  to  whom  it  seemed  they  naturally  belonged  can  prove  that 
this  neglect  was  intentional  and  more  efficacious  in  winning  them  than  the  greater 
apparent  diligence  of  others ;  when  the  episcopal  judges  shall  be  convinced  that  this  is 
the  case,  they  shall  restore  the  places  to  his  see.  If  the  bishops  between  whom  the 
cause  lies  are  of  different  provinces,  let  the  Primate  in  whose  province  the  place  is 
situated  about  which  there  is  the  dispute,  appoint  judges ;  but  if  by  mutual  consent 
they  have  chosen  as  judges  the  neighbouring  bishops,  let  one  or  three  be  chosen :  so 
that  if  they  choose  three  they  may  follow  the  sentence  of  all  or  of  two. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  CXXI. 
If  any  neglect  wJiat  belongs  to  their  jurisdiction, 
let  them  be  admonished;  and  if  they  shall  do  noth- 
ing within  a  six  month,  let  them  be  adjudged  to 
him  who  can  win  them.  But  if  they  have  com- 
mitted the  neglect  out  of  policy  so  as  not  to  irri- 


tate the  heretics,  and  this  shall  appear  to  have 
been  the  case,  their  sees  shall  be  restored  to  them, 
by  the  judgment  of  the  bishops  either  appointed 
or  elected. 

This  is  Canon  xiij.  of  Carthage,  a.d.  418. 


CANON  CXXII.    (Greek  exxiii.) 

The  sentence  of  the  elected  judges  ought  not  to  he  spurned. 

Feom  the  judges  chosen  by  common  consent  of  the  parties,  no  appeal  can  be  taken ; 
and  whoever  shall  be  found  to  have  carried  such  an  appeal  and  contumaciously  to  be 
unwilling  to  submit  to  the  judges,  when  this  has  been  proved  to  the  primate,  let  him 
give  letters,  that  no  one  of  the  bishops  should  communicate  with  him  until  he  yield. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CXXII. 


A  judge  chosen   by  both  parties  cannot  be 
repudiated. 


This  is  Canon  xiv.  of  Carthage,  a.d.  418. 

Johnson. 
See  Canons  76  (79)  and  80  (83). 


502 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


CANON  CXXIII,     (Greek  cxxiv.) 

That  if  a  bishop  neglects  his  diocese  he  is  to  be  deprived  of  communion. 

If  in  the  mother  cathedrals  a  bishop  should  have  been  negligent  against  the  here- 
tics, let  a  meeting  be  held  of  the  neighbouring  diligent  bishops,  and  let  his  negligence 
be  pointed  out  to  him,  so  that  he  can  have  no  excuse.  But  if  Avithin  six  months  after 
this  meeting,  if  an  execution  was  in  his  own  province,  and  he  had  taken  no  care  to 
convert  them  to  Catholic  unity,  no  one  shall  communicate  with  him  till  he  does  his 
duty.  But  if  no  executor  shall  have  come  to  the  places,  then  the  fault  shall  not  be  laid 
to  the  bishop. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CXXIII. 

A  bishop  iclio  spurns  the  care  of  heretics,  and 
if  after  being  warned  lie  continues  for  six  months 
in  his  contempt,  and  has  no  care  for  their  con- 
version, is  to  be  excommunicated. 

This  is  Canon  xv.  of  Carthage,  a.d.  418. 


Johnson. 

So  [i.e.  "Metropoles  "]  I  turn  matrices  cathe- 
dra?. I  know  indeed  there  -were  no  fixed  ec- 
clesiastical metropoles,  in  Africa  ;  but  they 
had  civil  metropoles  called  by  that  name,  can. 
86,  (89)  which  see. 

Of  these  officers  [i.e.  "Executors"]  see  can. 
97  (100). 


CANON  CXXIV.    (Greek  exxv.) 

Of  bishops  who  shall  lie  with  regard  to  Donalists'  communions. 

If  it  shall  be  proven  that  any  bishop  has  lied  concerning  the  communion  of  those 
[who  had  been  Donatists],  and  had  said  that  they  had  communicated  when  he  knew  it 
was  an  established  fact  that  they  had  not  done  so,  let  him  lose  his  bishoprick. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  CXXIV.  This  is  Canon  xvj.  of  Carthage,  a.d.  418. 

Wlxoso  says  that  a  man,  lohom  he  knoivs  does 
not  communicate,  does  communicate  is   to   be  \ 
deprived  of  his  episcopate. 

CANON   CXXV.     (Greek   exxvi.) 

That  presbyters  and  clerics  are  not  to  ap>peal  except  to  African  Synods. 

Item,  it  seemed  good  that  presbyters,  deacons,  or  other  of  the  lower  clergy  who  are 
to  be  tried,  if  they  question  the  decision  of  their  bishops,  the  neighbouring  bishops 
having  been  invited  by  them  with  the  consent  of  their  bishops,  shall  hear  them  and 
determine  whatever  separates  them.  But  should  they  think  an  appeal  should  be  car- 
ried from  them,  let  them  not  carry  the  appeal  except  to  African  councils  or  to  the 
primates  of  their  provinces.  But  whoso  shall  think  of  carrying  an  appeal  across  seas 
he  shall  be  admitted  to  communion  by  no  one  in  Africa. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CXXV. 
A  presbyter  and  deacon,  icho  has  been  con- 
demned by  his  own  bishop,  let  him  appeal  to  the 
neighbouring  bishops:  but  let  them  not  cross  tlie 
sea.     In  Africa  they  shall  be  excommunicated. 


This  is  Canon  xvij.  of  Carthage,  a.d.  418. 

Johnson. 
A  repetition  of  Canon  28  (31). 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


503 


CANON   CXXVI.     (Greek  cxxvii.) 

That  Virgins,  even  when  minors,  should  he  given  the  veil. 

Item,  it  seemed  good  that  whatever  bishop,  by  the  necessity  of  the  dangers  of  vir- 
ginal purity,  when  either  a  powerful  suitor  or  some  ravisher  is  feared,  or  if  she  shall 
be  pricked  with  some  scruple  of  death  that  she  might  die  unveiled,  at  the  demand 
either  of  her  parents  or  of  those  to  whose  care  she  has  been  entrusted,  shall  give  the 
veil  to  a  virgin,  or  shall  have  given  it  while  she  was  under  twenty -five  years  of  age,  the 
council  which  has  appointed  that  number  of  years  shall  not  oppose  him. 


NOTES. 
Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CXXVI. 
Whosoever  has  veiled  or  shall  veil  a  virgin 


before  site  is  twenty-five  years  of  aye  (that  is 
give  her  the  habit,  or  clothe  her),  being  forced 
thereto  on  account  of  a  powerful  lover,  or  a 
ravisher,  or  deadly  disease,  provided  those  who 


have  the  charge  of  her  so  exhort,  shcdl  receive  no 
damage  from  the  synod  concerning  that  age. 

This  is  Canon  xviij.  of  Carthage,  a.d.  418. 
The  reference  to  a  former  canon  is  to  Canon  j. 
of  the  second  series  of  the  canons  of  the  Synod 
of  Hippo  in  a.d.  393. 


CANON  CXXVII.    (Greek  exxviii.) 

That  bishops  he  not  detained  too  long  in  council,  let  them  choose  three  judges  from 
themselves  of  the  singular  provinces.  . 

Item,  it  seemed  good,  lest  all  the  bishops  who  are  assembled  at  a  council  be  kept  too 
long,  that  the  whole  synod  should  choose  three  judges  of  the  several  provinces  ;  and  they 
elected  for  the  province  of  Carthage  Vincent,  Fortunatian,  and  Clarus  ;  for  the  province 
of  Numidia  Alypius,  Augustine,  and  Restitutus ;  for  the  province  of  B}Tzacena,  Avith  the 
holy  Senex  Donatian  the  Primate,  Cresconius,  Jocundus,  and  iEmilian ;  for  Mauritania 
Sitephensis  Severiau,  Asiaticus,  and  Donatus  ;  for  the  Tripolitan  province  Plautius,  who 
alone  was  sent  as  legate  according  to  custom ;  all  these  were  to  take  cognizance  of  all 
things  with  the  holy  senex  Aurelius,  from  whom  the  whole  council  sought  that  he  should 
subscribe  all  things  done  by  the  council  whether  acts  or  letters.  And  they  subscribed  : 
I,  Aurelius,  bishop  of  the  church  of  Carthage  consent  to  this  decree  and  having  read  it 
sign  my  name.     Likewise  also  signed  they  all. 


Ancient  Epitome  or  Canon  CXXVII. 

Whenever  the  bishops  who  come  to  synod  can 
remain  no  longer  in  attendance,  let  three  be  chosen 
from  each  province. 


This  is  Canon  xix.  of  Carthage,  a.d.  418. 


Johnson. 

Two  Sancti  Senes  mentioned,  who  we  are 
sure  were  both  primates.    See  can.  100  (104). 

See  can.  14. 

And  here  we  have  an  ancient  precedent  for 
synods  delegating  their  authority  to  a  com- 
mittee, with  the  primate  of  all  Africa  at  the 
head  of  it. 


Item,  at  this  council  there  was  present  a  legation  from  the  Roman  Church. 

After  the  consulate  of  the  most  glorious  emperors  Honorius  for  the  Xllth.  time  and 
Theodosius  for  the  Vlllth.,  Augusti,  on  the  III.  Calends  of  June,  at  Carthage,  in  the 
Secretarium  of  the  restored  basilica,  when  Aurelius  the  bishop  together  with  Faustinus 
of  the  church  of  Potentia  in  the  Italian  province  of  Picenum,  a  legate  of  the  Roman 
Church,  Vincent  of  Calvita  *  (Culositanus),  Fortunatian  of  Naples,  Marianus  Uzipparen- 


1  Not  Calusita. 


504  AEKICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 

sis,  Adeodatus  of  Simidica,  Pentadius  of  Carpi,  Rufinian  of  Muzuba,  Pnetextatus  of 
Sicily,  Quodvultdeus  of  Veri  (Verensis),  Candidus  of  Abbirita,  Gallonian  of  Utica,  legates 
of  the  proconsular  province ;  Alypius  of  Tagaste,  Augustine  of  Hippo  Regia  and  Posid- 
onius  of  Calama,  legates  of  the  province  of  Nuniidia ;  Maximian  of  Aquae,  Jocundus  of 
Sufetula,  and  Hilary  of  Horrea-Cascilia,  legates  of  the  province  of  Byzacena;  Novatus 
of  Sitifi  and  Leo  of  Mocta,  legates  of  the  province  of  Mauritania  Sitiphensis ;  Ninellus 
of  Rusucarruru,  Laurence  of  Icosium  and  Nunierian  of  Rusgunium,  legates  of  the  Prov- 
ince of  Mauritania  C?esariensis,  the  judges  chosen  by  the  plenary  council,  had  taken 
their  seats,  the  deacons  standing  by,  and  when,  after  certain  things  had  been  accom- 
plished, many  bishops  complained  that  it  was  not  possible  for  them  to  wait  for  the  com- 
pletion of  the  rest  of  the  business  to  be  treated  of,  and  that  they  must  hasten  to  their 
own  churches ;  it  seemed  good  to  the  whole  council,  that  by  all  some  should  be  chosen 
from  each  province  who  should  remain  to  finish  up  what  was  left  to  be  done.  And  it 
came  about  that  those  were  present  whose  subscriptions  testify  that  they  were  present. 


CANON   CXXVIII.     (Greek  cxxix.) 

That  those  out  of  communion  should  not  be  allowed,  to  bring  accusation, 

It  seemed  good  to  all,  as  it  had  been  decreed  by  the  former  councils,  concerning 
what  persons  were  to  be  admitted  to  bring  accusations  against  clerics ;  and  since  it  had 
not  been  expressed  what  persons  should  not  be  admitted,  therefore  we  define,  that  he 
cannot  properly  be  admitted  to  bring  an  accusation,  who  had  been  already  excommuni- 
cated, and  was  still  lying  under  that  censure,  whether  he  that  wished  to  be  the  accuser 
were  cleric  or  layman. 


NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CXXVIII. 
One  excommunicated  is  not  to  give  witness. 


But  when  it  met  again  on  the  30th  of  the 
same  month,  it  continued  the  code.  The  in- 
troduction in  regard  to  this  new  session  is 
this  introduction.  The  Canons  then  enacted 
The  Council  of  Carthage  of  419  had  at  its  j  were  original,  viz.  numbers  128, 129, 130,  131, 
first  session  on  May  25th  done  thus  much.  !  132  and  133. 

CANON   CXXIX.     (Greek  exxx.) 

That  slaves  and freedmen  and  all  infamous  persons  ought  not  to  bring  accusation. 

To  all  it  seemed  good  that  no  slaves  or  freedmen,  properly  so  called,  be  admitted  to 
accusation  nor  any  of  those  who  by  the  public  laws  are  debarred  from  bringing  accusa- 
tion in  criminal  proceedings.  This  also  is  the  case  with  all  those  who  have  the  stain 
of  infamy,  that  is  actors,  and  persons  subject  to  turpitudes,  also  heretics,  or  heathen, 
or  Jews  ;  but  even  all  those  to  whom  the  right  of  bringing  accusation  is  denied,  are 
not  forbidden  to  bring  accusation  in  their  own  suits. 


NOTES 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CXXIX. 
A  slave,  and  a  frecdman,  and  lie  tvho  before 


Was  accused  of  any  of  these  crimes  on  account  of 
which  he  is  not  admitted  in  court,  and  a  player, 
and  a  heathen,  and  a  heretic,  and  a  Jew 

[There  is  no  verb  to  finish  the  sentence. 


However,  this  is  intended  as  a  continuation  of 
the  epitome  of  the  former  canon,  the  words  to 
be  supplied  being  "are  not  to  give  witness."] 


Johnson. 
See  Can.,  Const.,  6. 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419  505 


CANON  CXXX.     (Greek  cxxxi.) 

That  he  who  has  failed  to  prove  one  charge  shall  not  be  allowed  to  give  evidence  to 
another. 

So,  too,  ifc  seemed  good  that  as  often  as  many  crimes  were  laid  to  clerics  by  their 
accusers,  and  one  of  the  first  examined  could  not  be  proved,1  they  should  not  be  allowed 
to  go  on  giving  evidence  on  the  other  counts. 

Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  CXXX. 
He  who  makes  many  accusations  and  proves  nothing  [is  not  to  give  witness], 

CANON  CXXXI.     (Greek  exxxii.) 

Who  should  he  alloioed  to  give  evidence. 

They  who  are  forbidden  to  be  admitted  as  accusers  are  not  to  be  allowed  to  appear 
as  witnesses,  nor  any  that  the  accuser  may  bring  from  his  own  household.  And  none 
shall  be  admitted  to  give  witness  under  fourteen  years  of  age. 

NOTES. 

Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  CXXXI.  Johnson. 

And  whoso  is  not  past  fourteen  gears  of  age  [is       See  Can.  129. 
not  to  give  witness] .     An  accuser  is  not  to  pro-  \ 
ducc  witnesses  from  his  own  house. 

CANON   CXXXII.     (Greek  exxxiii.) 

Concerning  a  bishop  who  removes  a  man  from  communion  who  says  he  has  confessed 
to  the  bishop  alone  his  crime. 

It  also  seemed  good  that  if  on  any  occasion  a  bishop  said  that  someone  had  con- 
fessed to  him  alone  a  personal  crime,  and  that  the  man  now  denies  it ;  let  not  the 
bishop  think  that  any  slight  is  laid  upon  him  if  he  is  not  believed  on  his  own  word 
alone,  although  he  says  he  is  not  willing  to  communicate  with  the  man  so  denying 
through  a  scruple  of  his  own  conscience. 

NOTES. 
Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  CXXXII.  N.B.     The  word  used  for  "someone"  in 

If  a  bishop  sags  "someone  has  confessed  to  me  j  the  Epitome  is  Tre'Aas,  which  ordinarily  means 
alone,  a  crime  "  if  the  someone  denies  it,  he  [i.e.  i  »  " neighbour  "  but  may  mean  "any  one." 
the  bishop]  is  not  easily  to  be  believed.  I  Vide  Liddell  and  Scott. 

CANON  CXXXIII.     (Greek  exxxiv.) 

That  a  bishop  should  not  rashly  deprive  anyone  of  communion. 

As  long  as  his  own  bishop  will  not  communicate  with  one  excommunicated,  the 
other  bishops  should  have  no  communion  with  that  bishop,  that  the  bishop  may  be  more 
careful  not  to  charge  anyone  with  what  he  cannot  prove  by  documentary  evidence  to 
others. 

(Greek  exxxv.) 

Bishop  Aubelius  said :  According  to  the  statutes  of  this  whole  assembled  council, 
and  the  opinion  of  my  littleness,  it  seems  good  to  make  an  end  of  all  the  matters  of  the 
whole  of  the  before-manifested  title,  and  let  the  ecclesiastical  acts  receive  the  discus- 
sion of  the  present  day's  constitution. 

1  The  Latin  here  is  evidently  corrupt. 


506 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


And  -what  things  have  not  yet  been  expressed  ("  treated  of  "  in  the  Greek)  we  shall 
write  on  the  next  day  through  our  brethren,  Bishop  Faustinus  and  the  Presbyters  Philip 
and  Asellus  to  our  venerable  brother  and  fellow-bishop  Boniface ;  and  they  gave  their 
assent  in  writing. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CXXXIII. 

If  a  bishop  deprives  of  communion  an  uncon- 
victed man,  lie  shall  likewise  be  deprived  of  com- 
munion with  Ms  fellows. 


Johnson. 

Never  was  a  more  impartial  law  made,  es- 
pecially when  all  the  legislators  were  bishops 
except  two.     There  were  217  bishops,  and  two 


priests,    being   legates   from   the   bishop    of 
Rome. 

The  Greeks  make  a  canon  of  the  ratifica- 
tions, and  reckon  no  more  than  135.  Aure- 
lius,  Bishop  of  Carthage,  subscribes  first,  and 
after  him  217  bishops,  then  Asellus  and  Phil- 
ippus,  priests,  legates  of  the  church  of  Rome. 
And  it  does  not  appear  that  any  other  priests 
were  present  in  any  of  the  councils,  mentioned 
in  the  body  of  this  code  ;  but  there  is  several 
times  notice  taken  of  the  deacons  who  stood  by. 


CANON   CXXXIV.    (Continuation  of  exxxv.  in  the  Greek.) 

Here  beginneth  the  letter  directed  from  the  whole  African  Council  to  Boniface,  bishop 
of  the  City  of  Rome,  by  Faustinus  the  bishop,  and  Philij)  and  Asellus  the  presbyters, 
legates  of  the  Roman  Church. 

To  the  most  blessed  lord,  and  our  honourable  brother  Boniface,  Aurelius,  Valentine 
of  the  primatial  See  of  Nuinidia,  and  others  present  with  us  to  the  number  of  217  from 
the  whole  council  in  Africa. 

Since  it  has  pleased  the  Lord  that  our  humility  should  write  concerning  those  things 
which  with  us  our  holy  brethren,  Faustinus  a  fellow-bishop  and  Philip  and  Asellus,  fel- 
low presbyters,  have  done,  not  to  the  bishop  Zosimus  of  blessed  memory,  from  whom 
they  brought  commands  and  letters  to  us,  but  to  your  holiness,  who  art  constituted  in 
his  room  by  divine  authority,  we  ought  briefly  to  set  forth  what  has  been  determined 
upon  by  mutual  consent ;  not  indeed  those  things  which  are  contained  in  the  prolix 
volumes  of  the  acts,  in  which,  while  charity  was  preserved,  yet  we  loitered  not  without 
some  little  labour  of  altercation,  deliberating  those  things  in  the  acts  which  now  pertain 
to  the  cause.  However  the  more  gratefully  would  he  have  received  this  news  as  he  would 
have  seen  a  more  peaceful  ending  of  the  matter,  my  lord  and  brother,  had  he  been  still 
in  the  body !  Apiarius  the  presbyter,  concerning  whose  ordination,  excommunication, 
and  appeal  no  small  scandal  arose  not  only  at  Sicca  but  also  in  the  whole  African 
Church,  has  been  restored  to  communion  upon  his  seeking  pardon  for  all  his  sins.  First 
our  fellow  bishop  Urban  of  Sicca  doubtless  corrected  whatever  in  him  seemed  to  need 
correction.  For  there  should  have  been  kept  in  mind  the  peace  and  quiet  of  the  Church 
not  only  in  the  present  but  also  in  the  future,  since  so  many  evils  of  such  a  kind  had 
gone  before,  that  it  was  incumbent  to  take  care  that  like  or  even  graver  evils  should  be 
prevented  thereafter.  It  seemed  good  to  us  that  the  presbyter  Apiarius  should  be  re- 
moved from  the  church  of  Sicca,  retaining  only  the  honour  of  his  grade,  and  that  he 
should  exercise  the  office  of  the  presbyterate  wherever  else  he  wished  and  could,  having 
received  a  letter  to  this  effect.  This  we  granted  without  difficulty  at  his  own  petition 
made  in  a  letter.  But  truly  before  this  case  should  be  thus  closed,  among  other  things 
which  we  were  treating  of  in  daily  discussions,  the  nature  of  the  case  demanded  that  we 
should  ask  our  brothers,  Faustinus  our  fellow  bishop,  and  Philip  and  Asellus  our  fellow 
presbyters,  to  set  forth  what  they  had  been  enjoined  to  treat  of  with  us  that  they  might 
be  inserted  in  the  ecclesiastical  acts.  And  they  proceeded  to  make  a  verbal  statement, 
but  when  we  earnestly  asked  that  they  would  present  it  rather  in  writing,  then  they  pro- 
duced the  Commonitory.     This  was  read  to  us  and  also  set  down  in  the  acts,  which  they 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  419 


507 


are  bringing  "with  them  to  you.  In  this  they  were  bidden  to  treat  of  four  things  with 
us,  first  concerning  the  appeal  of  bishops  to  the  Pontiff  of  the  Roman  Church,  second 
that  bishops  should  not  unbecomingly  be  sailing  to  court,  thirdly  concerning  the  treat- 
ing the  causes  of  presbyters  and  deacons  by  contiguous  bishops,  if  they  had  been 
wrongly  excommunicated  by  their  own,  and  fourthly  concerning  the  bishop  Urban  who 
should  be  excommunicated  or  even  sent  to  Home,  unless  he  should  have  corrected  what 
seemed  to  need  correction.  Of  all  which  things  concerning  the  first  and  third,  that  is 
that  it  is  allowed  to  bishops  to  appeal  to  Eome  and  that  the  causes  of  clerics  should  be 
settled  by  the  bishops  of  their  oavii  provinces,  already  last  year  Ave  have  taken  pains  to 
insinuate,  in  our  letter  to  the  same  bishop  Zosimus  of  venerable  memory,  that  we  were 
willing  to  observe  these  provisions  for  a  little  while  without  any  injury  to  him,  until  the 
search  for  the  statutes  of  the  Council  of  Nice  had  been  finished.  And  now  we  ask  of 
your  holiness  that  you  would  cause  to  be  observed  by  us  the  acts  and  constitutions  of 
our  fathers  at  the  Council  of  Nice,  and  that  you  cause  to  be  exercised  by  you  there,  those 
things  which  they  brought  in  the  commonitory :  that  is  to  say,  If  a  bishop  shall  have 
been  accused,  etc.     [Here  follows  Canon  vii.  of  Sardica.] 

Item  concerning  presbyters  and  deacons.  If  any  bishop  has  been  quickly  angered, 
etc.     [Here  follows  Canon  xvii.  of  Sardica.] 

These  are  the  things  which  have  been  inserted  in  the  acts  until  the  arrival  of  the 
most  accurate  copies  of  the  Nicene  Council,  which  things,1  if  they  are  contained  there 
(as  in  the  Commonitory,  which  our  brethren  directed  to  us  from  the  Apostolic  See 
alleged)  and  be  even  kept  according  to  that  order  by  you  in  Italy,  in  no  way  could  we  be 
compelled  either  to  endure  such  treatment  as  we  are  unwilling  to  mention  or  could  suf- 
fer what  is  unbearable : 2  but  we  believe,  through  the  mercy  of  our  Lord  God,  while  your 
holiness  presides  over  the  Roman  Church,  we  shall  not  have  to  suffer  that  pride  (istum 
typlium  passuri).  And  there  will  be  kept  toward  us,  what  should  be  kept  with  brotherly 
love  to  us  who  are  making  no  dispute.  You  will  also  perceive  according  to  the  wisdom 
and  the  justice  which  the  most  Highest  has  given  thee,  what  should  be  observed,3  if  per- 
chance the  canons  of  the  Council  of  Nice  are  other  [than  you  suppose] .  For  although 
we  have  read  very  many  copies,  yet  never  have  we  read  in  the  Latin  copies  that  there 
were  any  such  decrees  as  are  contained  in  the  commonitory  before  mentioned.  So  too, 
because  we  can  find  them  in  no  Greek  text  here,  we  have  desired  that  there  should  be 
brought  to  us  from  the  Eastern  Churches  copies  of  the  decrees,  for  it  is  said  that  there 
correct  copies  of  the  decrees  are  to  be  found.  For  which  end  we  beg  your  reverence, 
that  you  would  deign  yourself  also  to  write  to  the  pontiffs  of  these  parts,  that  is  of  the 
churches  of  Antioch,  Alexandria,  and  Constantinople,4  and  to  any  others  also  if  it  shall 
please  your  holiness,  that  thence  there  may  come  to  us  the  same  canons  decreed  by  the 
Fathers  in  the  city  of  Nice,  and  thus  you  would  confer  by  the  help  of  the  Lord  this  most 
great  benefit  upon  all  the  churches  of  the  West.  For  who  can  doubt  that  the  copies  of 
the  Nicene  Council  gathered  in  the  Greek  empire  are  most  acciirate,  which  although 
brought  together  from  so  diverse  and  from  such  noble  Greek  churches  are  found  to  agree 
when  compared  together  ?  And  until  this  be  done,  the  provisions  laid  down  to  us  in 
the  Commonitory  aforesaid,  concerning  the  appeals  of  bishops  to  the  pontiff  of  the  Eo- 
man Church  and  concerning  the  causes  of  clerics  which  should  be  terminated  by  the 
bishops  of  their  own  provinces,  we  are  willing  to  allow  to  be  observed  until  the  proof  ar- 
rives and  we  trust  your  blessedness  will  help  us  in  this  according  to  the  will  of  God. 
The  rest  of  the  matters  treated  and  defined  in  our  synod,  since  the  aforesaid  brethren, 
our  fellow  bishop  Faustinus,  and  the  presbyters  Philip  and  Asellus  are  carrying  the  acts 
with  them,  if  you  deign  to  receive  them,  will  make  known  to  your  holiness.  And  they 
signed.3  Our  Lord  keep  thee  to  us  for  many  years,  most  blessed  brother.  Alypius, 
Augustine,  Possidius,  Marinus  and  the  rest  of  the  bishops  [217]  also  signed. 


1  The  text  here  is  very  uncertain.    1  follow  Allies. 

J  It  is  evident  that  the  Latin  text  here  is  corrupt  in  more  places 
than  one.  There  would  seem  to  be  no  doubt  that  for  Migne's  read- 
ing quce  sibi,  the  Greek  translators  had  quce  siibi  and  accordingly 
rendered  it  Unva  i*v  IkcI,  and  so  the  text  stands  in  Labbe  and 


Cossart.    The  following  sentence  is  also  clearly  in  a  somewhat  al- 
tered form  from  its  original. 

3  L.  and  C.  insert  here  wrongly  a  nisi. 

4  This  order  of  naming  the  sees  is  worthy  of  note. 
6  So  in  the  Greek ;  the  Latin  readB  Et  alia  manu, 


508 


AFRICAN   CODE.     A.D.  410 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CXXXIV. 
Urban,  the  bislioji  of  Siccus,  is  either  to  be  ex- 


communicated or  else  summoned  to  Rome  unless 
he  corrects  what  should  be  corrected  by  him. 


CANON   CXXXV.     (Not  numbered  in  the  Greek.) 

Here  begin  the  rescripts  to  the  African  Council  from  Cyril  bishop  of  Alexandria  in 
which  he  sends  the  authentic  proceedings  of  the  Nicene  Council,1  translated  from  the 
Greek  by  Innocent  the  presbyter :  these  letters  vjith  the  same  Nicene  council  were  also 
sent  through  the  aforementioned  presbyter  Innocent  and  by  Marcellus  a  subdeacoti  of 
the  Church  of  Carthage,  to  the  holy  Boniface,  bishop  of  the  Roman  Church,  on  the  sixth 
day  before  the  calends  of  December  in  the  year  419.- 

To  the  most  honourable  lords,  our  holy  brethren  and  fellow  bishops,  Aurelius, 
Valentinus,  as  well  as  to  the  whole  holy  synod  met  in  Carthage,  Cyril  salutes  your 
holiness  in  God. 

I  have  received  with  all  joy  at  the  hands  of  our  son,  the  presbyter  Innocent,  the 
letters  of  your  reverence  so  full  of  piety,  in  -which  you  express  the  hope  that  we  will 
send  you  most  accurate  copies  of  the  decrees  of  the  holy  Fathers  at  the  Synod  held  at 
Nice  the  metropolis  of  Bithynia  from  the  archives  of  our  church  ;  Avith  our  own 
certificate  of  accuracy  attached  thereto.  In  answer  to  which  request,  most  honourable 
lords  and  brethren,  I  have  thought  it  necessary  to  send  to  you,  with  our  compliments, 
by  our  sou,  Innocent  the  presbyter,  the  bearer  of  these,  most  faithfvd  copies  of  the 
decisions  of  the  synod  held  at  Nice  in  Bithynia.  And  when  ye  have  sought  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  church,  you  will  find  them  there  also.  Concerning  Easter,  as  you  have 
written,  we  announce  to  you  that  we  shall  celebrate  it  on  the  xviiith 3  before  the  calends 
of  May  of  the  next  indiction.  The  subscription.  May  God  and  our  Lord  preserve 
your  holy  synod  as  we  desire,  dear  brethren. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CXXXV. 
According  to  your  written  request,  we  have  sent 


to  your  charity  most  faithful  copies  of  the  au- 
thentic decrees  of  the  Synod  which  was  held  at 
Nice,  a  city  of  Bithynia. 


CANON    CXXXVI.     (Not  numbered  in  the  Greek  but  Avith  a  new  heading.) 
Here  beginneth  the  letter  of  Atticus,  bishop  of  Constantinople  to  the  same. 

To  our  holy  lords,  and  rightly  most  blessed  brethren  and  felloAv  bishops,  Aurelius, 
Valentine,  and 4  to  the  other  beloved  ones  met  together  in  the  Synod  held  at  Carthage, 
Atticus  the  bishop. 

By  our  son  Marcellus  the  subdeacon,  I  have  received  Avith  all  thanksgiving  the  writings 
of  your  holiness,  praising  the  Lord  that  I  enjoyed  the  blessing  of  so  many  of  my  breth- 
ren. O  my  lords  and  most  blessed  brethren,  ye  have  written  asking  me  to  send 
you  most  accurate  copies  of  the  canons  enacted  at  the  city  of  Nice,  the  metropolis  of 
Bithynia,  by  the  Fathers  for  the  exposition  of  the  faith.  And  avIio  is  there  that  would 
deny  to  his"brethren  the  common  faith,  or  the  statutes  decreed  by  the  Fathers.  Where- 
fore by  the  same  son  of  mine,  Marcellus,  your  subdeacon,  avIio  Avas  in  great  haste,  I 
have  sent  to  you  the  canons  in  full  as  they  Avere  adopted  by  the  Fathers  in  the  city  of 
Nice ;  and  I  ask  of  you  that  your  holy  synod  Avould  haAre  me  much  in  your  prayers. 
The  subscription.     May  our  God  keep  your  sanctity,  as  Ave  desire,  most  holy  brethren. 


1  The  Greek  adds  "and  the  canons." 

3  No  year  is  given  in  the  Greek  nor  in  M:gne's  Latin. 


3  Brims  says  "all  the  books  "  read  "  xvij.  Kal.,''  but,  as  a  fact, 
Easter  was  "  xiv.  Kal."  that  year. 

4  So  in  the  Greek,  vet  in  Latin. 


AFKICAN   CODE.    A.P.  419  509 

CANON  CXXXVII.     (Continuation  of  the  last  in  the  Greek.) 

Here  begin  the  examples  of  the  Nicene  Council,  sent  on  the  sixth  day  before  the  calends 
of  December  in  the  year  419,1  after  the  consulate  of  the  most  glorious  emperor  Honorius 
for  the  Xllth  time,  and  Theodosius  for  the  IXth  time?  Augustuses,  to  Boniface  the 
bishop  of  the  City  of  Rome. 

We  believe  in  one  God  etc.  .  .  .  the  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church  anathema- 
tizes them.3 

To  this  symbol  of  the  faith  there  were  also  annexed  copies  of  the  statutes  of  the 
same  Nicene  Councils  from  the  aforenamed  pontiffs,  in  all  respects  as  are  contained 
above  ;  which  we  do  not  think  it  necessary  to  write  out  here  again. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  CXXXVII. 
The  Canons  of  the  Synod  of  Nice  are  sent,  as 
they  were  decreed  by  the  Fathers,  in  accordance 
with  your  letters. 


[Here  follows  the  Nicene  Creed  in  full.] 


CANON  CXXXVIIL     (Not  numbered  in  the  Greek.) 

Here  beginneth  the  epistle  of  the  African  synod  to  Pope  Celestine,  bishop  of  the  City  of 
Rome. 

To  the  lord  and  most  beloved  and  our  honourable  brother  Celestine,  Aurelius, 
Palatinus,  Antony,  Totus,  Servusdei,  Terentius,  Fortunatus,  Martin,  Januarius,  Opta- 
tus,  Ceticius,  Donatus,  Theasius,  Vincent,  Fortunatian,  and  the  rest  of  us,  assembled  at 
Carthage  in  the  General  Council  of  Africa. 

We  could  wish  that,  like  as  your  Holiness  intimated  to  us,  in  your  letter  sent  by 
our  fellow  presbyter  Leo,  your  pleasure  at  the  arrival  of  Apiarius,  so  we  also  could 
send  to  you  these  writings  with  pleasure  respecting  his  clearing.  Then  in  truth  both 
our  own  satisfaction,  and  yours  of  late  would  be  more  reasonable  ;  nor  would  that  lately 
expressed  by  you  concerning  the  hearing  of  him  then  to  come,  as  well  as  that  already 
past,  seem  hasty  and  inconsiderate.  Upon  the  arrival,  then,  of  our  holy  Brother  and 
fellow-Bishop  Faustinus,  we  assembled  a  council,  and  believed  that  he  was  sent  with 
that  man,  in  order  that,  as  he  [Apiarius]  had  before  been  restored  to  the  presbyterate 
by  his  assistance,  so  now  he  might  with  his  exertions  be  cleared  of  the  very  great  crimes 
charged  against  him  by  the  inhabitants  of  Tabraca.  But  the  due  course  of  examina- 
tion in  our  council  discovered  in  him  such  great  and  monstrous  crimes  as  to  overbear 
even  Faustinus,  who  acted  rather  as  an  advocate  of  the  aforementioned  person  than  as 
a  judge,  and  to  prevail  against  what  was  more  the  zeal  of  a  defender,  than  the  justice  of 
an  inquirer.  For  first  he  vehemently  opposed  the  whole  assembly,  inflicting  on  us 
many  injuries,  under  pretence  of  asserting  the  privileges  of  the  Roman  Church,  and 
wishing  that  he  should  be  received  into  communion  by  us,  on  the  ground  that  your 
Holiness,  believing  him  to  have  appealed,  though  unable  to  prove  it,  had  restored  him 
to  communion.  But  this  we  by  no  means  allowed,  as  you  will  also  better  see  by  read- 
ing the  acts.  After  however,  a  most  laborious  inquiry  carried  on  for  three  days,  during 
which  in  the  greatest  affliction  we  took  cognizance  of  various  charges  against  him,  God 
the  just  Judge,  strong  and  long  suffering,  cut  short  by  a  sudden  stroke  both  the  delays 
of  our  fellow-bishop  Faustinus  and  the  evasions  of  Apiarius  himself,  by  which  he  was 
endeavouring  to  veil  his  foul  enormities.     For  his  strong  and  shameless  obstinacy  was 

1  No  year  in  the  Greek  nor  in  Migne's  Latin.  3  In  the  Greek  the  creed  is  not  given  here  in  full,  but  as  fol- 

2  Bruns  notes  with  Justellus  and  Hardouin  and  the  Codd.  Hisp.  j  lows  :    *'  We  believe  in  one  God  the  Father ;  and  then  the  holy 
this  should  read  viii.  for  ix.  \  creed  as  written  in  the  first  synod," 


510  AFRICAN  CODE.     A.D.  419 

overcome,  by  which  he  endeavoured  to  cover,  through  an  impudent  denial,  the  mire  of 
his  lusts,  and  God  so  wrought  upon  his  conscience  and  published,  even  to  the  eyes  of 
men,  the  secret  crimes  which  he  was  already  condemning  in  that  man's  heart,  a  very 
sty  of  wickedness,  that,  after  his  false  denial  he  suddenly  burst  forth  into  a  confession 
of  all  the  crimes  he  was  charged  with,  and  at  length  convicted  himself  of  his  own 
accord  of  all  infamies  beyond  belief,  and  changed  to  groans  even  the  hope  we  had 
entertained,  believing  and  desiring  that  he  might  be  cleared  from  such  shameful  blots, 
except  indeed  that  it  was  so  far  a  relief  to  our  sorrow,  that  he  had  delivered  us  from  the 
labour  of  a  longer  inquiry,  and  by  confession  had  applied  some  sort  of  remedy  to  his 
own  wounds,  though,  lord  and  brother,  it  was  unwilling,  and  done  with  a  struggling 
conscience.  Premising,  therefore,  our  due  regards  to  you,  we  earnestly  conjure  you, 
that  for  the  future  you  do  not  readily  admit  to  a  hearing  persons  coming  hence,  nor 
choose  to  receive  to  your  communion  those  who  have  been  excommunicated  by  us, 
because  you,  venerable  Sir,  will  readily  perceive  that  this  has  been  prescribed  even  by 
the  Nicene  council.  For  though  this  seems  to  be  there  forbidden  in  respect  of  the 
inferior  clergy,  or  the  laity,  how  much  more  did  it  will  this  to  be  observed  in  the  case 
of  bishops,  lest  those  who  had  been  suspended  from  communion  in  their  own  Province 
might  seem  to  be  restored  to  communion  hastily  or  unfitly  by  your  Holiness.  Let  your 
Holiness  reject,  as  is  worthy  of  you,  that  unprincipled  taking  shelter  with  you  of  pres- 
byters likewise,  and  the  inferior  clergy,  both  because  by  no  ordinance  of  the  Fathers 
hath  the  Church  of  Africa  been  deprived  of  this  authority,  and  the  Nicene  decrees  have 
most  plainly  committed  not  only  the  clergy  of  inferior  rank,  but  the  bishops  themselves 
to  their  own  Metropolitans.  For  they  have  ordained  with  great  wisdom  and  justice, 
that  all  matters  should  be  terminated  in  the  places  where  they  arise ;  and  did  not  think 
that  the  grace  of  the  Holy  Spirit  would  be  wanting  to  any  Province,  for  the  bishops  of 
Christ  (Sacerdotibus)  wisely  to  discern,  and  firmly  to  maintain  the  right :  especially 
since  whosoever  thinks  himself  wronged  by  any  judgment  may  appeal  to  the  council  of 
his  Province,  or  even  to  a  General  Council  [i.e.  of  Africa]  unless  it  be  imagined  that 
God  can  inspire  a  single  individual  with  justice,  and  refuse  it  to  an  innumerable  multi- 
tude of  bishops  (sacerdotwm)  assembled  in  council.  And  how  shall  we  be  able  to  rely 
on  a  sentence  passed  beyond  the  sea,  since  it  will  not  be  possible  to  send  thither  the 
necessary  witnesses,  whether  from  the  weakness  of  sex,  or  advanced  age,  or  any  other 
impediment?  For  that  your  Holiness  should  send  any  on  your  part  we  can  find 
ordained  by  no  council  of  Fathers.  Because  with  regard  to  what  you  have  sent  us  by 
the  same  our  brother  bishop  Faustinus,  as  being  contained  in  the  Nicene  Council,  we 
can  find  nothing  of  the  kind  in  the  more  authentic  copies  of  that  council,  which  we  have 
received  from  the  holy  Cyril  our  brother,  Bishop  of  the  Alexandrine  Church,  and  from 
the  venerable  Atticus  the  Prelate  of  Constantinople,  and  which  wre  formerly  sent  by 
Innocent  the  presbyter,  and  Marcellus  the  subdeacon  through  whom  Ave  received  them, 
to  Boniface  the  Bishop,  your  predecessor  of  venerable  memory.  Moreover  whoever 
desires  you  to  delegate  any  of  your  clergy  to  execute  your  orders,  do  not  comply,  lest  it 
seem  that  we  are  introducing  the  pride  of  secular  dominion  into  the  Church  of  Christ 
which  exhibiteth  to  all  that  desire  to  see  God  the  light  of  simplicity  and  the  day  of 
humility.  For  now  that  the  miserable  Apiarins  has  been  removed  out  of  the  Church 
of  Christ  for  his  horrible  crimes,  we  feel  confident  respecting  our  brother  Faustinus, 
that  through  the  uprightness  and  moderation  of  your  Holiness,  Africa,  without  violating 
brotherfy  charity,  will  by  no  means  have  to  endure  him  any  longer.  Lord  and  brother, 
may  our  Lord  long  preserve  your  Holiness  to  pray  for  us.1 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  CXXXVIII. 

Those  excommunicated  by  us,  ye  are  not  to 
be  willing  to  admit  afteriuards  to  communion, 
according  to   the  decree  of  the  Nicene  Synod. 


For  Apiarins,  who  teas  restored  by  you,  has 
resisted  the  Synod,  and  treated  it  with  scorn,  and 
at  length  has  been  converted  and  confessed  him- 
self guilty  with  sighs  and  tears. 


'  This  translation  is  by  Allies. 


COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANTINOPLE  HELD    UNDER    NECTARIUS. 

AD.  394. 


Introductory  Note. 
Extracts  from  the  Acts. 


Elenchus. 

Ancient  Epitome  and  Notes. 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE. 

The  acts  of  this  Council  are  found  in  Balsamon,  page  761  of  the  Paris  edition,  with 
Hervetus's  translation.  Labbe  J  has  taken  Balsaraon's  text  and  inserted  it  into  his  Collec- 
tion, from  which  the  following  translation  is  made.  There  is  another  version  extant  in 
Leunclavius,  Jus  Gfrceco-Boman.  p.  247. 

On  September  the  twenty-ninth  of  the  year  394,  a  magnificent  church,  dedicated  to  SS. 
Peter  and  Paul,  built  by  the  munificence  of  Rufinus  the  Prsetoreal  prefect,  and  situated  at 
a  place  called  "the  Oaks,"  a  suburb  of  Chalcedon,  was  consecrated.  Most  scholars  have 
adopted  Tillemont's  suggestion  that  this  was  the  occasion  which  brought  the  patriarchs  of 
Alexandria  and  Antioch  to  Constantinople,  aud  that  occasion  was  taken  advantage  of  to  hold 
a  synod  with  regard  to  the  dispute  as  to  the  see  of  Bostra.  At  this  council,  in  accordance 
with  the  canon  of  the  Second  Ecumenical  Council,  adopted  only  a  dozen  years  before,  Con- 
stantinople took  the  first  place  and  its  bishop  presided,  but  so  strong  was  the  hold  of  Alex- 
andria that  three  centuries  afterwards  the  Quinisext  Synod  speaks  of  this  council  as  held 
"  under  Nectarius  and  Theophilus."  In  passing  it  may  not  be  amiss  to  remark  that  St. 
Gregory  of  Nyssa  and  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  and  Flavian  were  present  at  this  council ! 
Well  may  Tillemont2  exclaim,  "It  is  remarkable  to  see  Theophilus  there  with  Flavian, 
although  they  were  not  in  communion  with  each  other." 

1  Labbe  and  Coseart,  Concilia,  Tom.  II.,  col.  1151.  a  Tillemont.    Memoires,  is.,  592. 


COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANTINOPLE  UNDER  NECTAFJUS  OF  CONSTANTI- 
NOPLE AND  THEOPHILUS  OF  ALEXANDRIA. 

A.D.  394, 


(Found  in  Beveridge,  Synodicon.    Tom.  I,  p.  678 ;  Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  II., 

col.  1151.     Both  taken  from  Balsamon.) 


In  the  consulate  of  our  most  religious  and 
beloved-of-God  Emperors,  Flavius  Arcadius 
Augustus,  for  the  third  time,  and  Honorius 
for  the  second  time,  on  the  third  day  before 
the  calends  of  October,  in  the  baptistery  of 
the  most  holy  church  of  Constantinople, 
when  the  most  holy  bishops  had  taken  their 
seats  [here  follow  the  names],  Nectarius,  the 
bishop  of  Constantinople,  said :  Since  by 
the  grace  of  God  this  synod  has  met  in  this 
holy  place,  if  the  synod  of  my  holy  brethren 
and  fellow  ministers  in  holy  things  thinks 
good,  since  I  see  our  brothers  Bagadius  and 
Agapius,  who  contend  between  themselves 
about  the  bishopric  of  Bostra,  are  also  pres- 
ent, let  these  begin  to  set  forth  their  mutual 
rights.  And  after  some  things  had  been 
done  by  them  for  the  sake  of  this  cause,  and 
it  had  been  shewn  that  the  afore- named 
Bagadius  was  deposed  by  only  two  bishops, 
both  of  whom  ivere  dead,  Arabianus,  bishop 
of  Aucyra,  said :  Not  on  account  of  this 
judgment,  but  fearing  henceforth  for  my 
whole  life,  I  desire  the  holy  Synod  to  make 
a  decree,  whether  or  no,  a  bishop  can  be 
deposed  by  only  two  bishops,  and  whether 
the  Metropolitan  is  absent  or  not,  without 
prejudice  to  the  present  cause.  For  I  fear 
that  some,  taking  their  power  from  these 
acts,  may  dare  to  attempt  such  things.  I 
wish  therefore  your  response. 

Nectarius,  the  bishop  of  Constantinople, 
said :  The  most  religious  bishop  Arabianus 
hath  spoken  most  laudably.  But  since  it  is 
impossible  to  go  backward  in  judgment,  let 
us,  without  condemning  that  which  is  past, 
establish  things  for  the  future.  Arabianus, 
bishop  of  Ancyra,  said :  The  synod  of  blessed 
fathers  who  met  at  Nice  condemns  what  has 
taken  place,  for  it  orders  that  not  less  than 


three  shall  ordain,  nor  even  so  without  the 
metropolitan.  But  of  the  future  I,  full  of 
fear,  have  made  this  question.  I  would 
wish  therefore  that  you  would  say  clearly 
and  without  delay  or  doubt,  that  a  bishop 
could  not,  according  to  the  decree  of  the 
Synod  of  Nice,  lawfully  be  ordained  or  de- 
posed by  two  men. 

And,  after  some  further  debate,  The- 
ophilus,  the  bishop  of  Alexandria,  said  : 
Against  those  who  have  gone  forth,  no 
sentence  of  indignation  can  be  pronounced, 
since  those  to  be  condemned  were  not  pres- 
ent. But  if  any  one  were  to  consider  those 
who  are  to  be  deposed  in  future,  it  seems  to 
me  that  not  only  these  ought  to  assemble, 
but  so  far  as  possible  all  the  other  provin- 
cials, that  by  the  sentence  of  many  there 
may  be  rendered  a  more  accurate  condem- 
nation of  him  who  is  present  and  is  being- 
judged,  and  who  deserves  deposition.  Nec- 
tarius, the  bishop  of  Constantinople,  said  : 
Since,  the  controversy  is  concerning  legiti- 
mate institutions  and  decrees,  it  follows  that 
nothing  must  be  decreed  on  account  of  per- 
sonal causes.  Wherefore  as  the  most  holy 
bishop  Arabianus  has  said,  wishing  to  make 
the  future  certain,  the  sentence  of  the  most 
holy  bishop  Theophilus  hath  consistently 
and  considerately  decreed  that  for  the  future 
it  shall  be  lawful  not  even  for  three,  far  less 
for  two  bishops  to  depose  him  who  is  exam- 
ined as  a  defendant :  but  by  the  sentence  of 
the  greater  synod  and  of  the  bishops  of  the 
province,  according  to  the  Apostolic  Canons. 
Flavian,  the  bishop  of  Antioch,  said  :  What 
things  the  most  holy  bishop  Nectarius,  and 
the  most  holy  bishop  Theophilus  have  set 
forth  are  clearly  right.    And  all  the  ecclesi- 


astics agreed  with  these. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome. 
In  future  when  a  defendant  is  examined,  he 


ought  not  to  be  deposed  by  two  or  three  bishops :  [provide 


but  by  the  sentence  of  the  greater  Synod  and  of 
his  own  provincials,  as  also  the  Apostolic  Canons 


VOL.    XIV. 


Ll 


514 


CONSTANTINOPLE  UNDER  NECTARIITS.    A.D.  394 


Balsamon. 

As  Bagadius,  the  bishop  of  Bostra,  had 
been  deposed  by  only  two  bishops,  the  mat- 
ter was  considered  in  the  synod  at  Constan- 
tinople, whether  that  deposition  had  been 
rightly  decreed.  Agapius,  the  elect,  laying- 
claim  to  it  under  the  decision.  And  it  was 
decreed  that  the  deposition  was  not  canoni- 
cal, since  not  two  but  a  number  should  judge 
of  those  accusations  which  are  made  against 
bishops.     But  know  that  this  constitution  has 


no  force  to-day,  for  by  the  twelfth  canon  of 
the  synod  of  Carthage,  which  is  much  later, 
crimes  charged  against  bishops  are  to  be 
judged  of  by  twelve  bishops.  Bead  that  can- 
on, and  know  that  this  synod  was  held  in  the 
time  of  the  Emperor  Arcadius,  while  that  of 
Carthage  was  in  the  days  of  Theodosius  the 
younger. 

Zonaras  explains  that  by  the  words  "  have 
gone  forth  "  in  the  speech  of  Theophilus  of 
Alexandria  is  to  be  understood  have  died. 


THE  COUNCIL  OF  CARTHAGE  HELD  UNDER  CYPRIAN. 

A.D.  257. 


Introductory  Note. 
The  remains  of  the  Acts, 


Elenchus. 


Notes,  with  St.  Cyprian's  Epistle  to  Janu- 
arms  et  al. 


L  1  2 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE. 

It  is  commonly  supposed  by  the  commentators  that  what  follows  is  the  "Canon  of  St. 
Cyprian  "  referred  to  in  the  Second  canon  of  the  Synod  in  Trullo.  Johnson x  thinks  that 
that  canon  comes  down  to  us  as  Canon  XXXIX.  of  the  Apostolic  Canons.  Baronius 2  agrees 
with  Asseman  3  in  thinking  that  from  hatred  to  Rome  the  Greeks  adopted  the  theory  of  the 
non-validity  of  heretical  baptism.  "But,"  as  Hefele  4  well  remarks,  "in  that  case  they  would 
have  contradicted  themselves." 

Zonaras  remarks  :  "  This  is  the  most  ancient  of  all  the  synods.  For  that  which  was  held 
at  Antioch  in  Syria  concerning  Paul  of  Samorata  was  more  ancient  than  the  others,  being 
holden  in  the  time  of  the  Roman  Emperor  Aurelius,  but  this  one  is  still  earlier.  For  the 
great  Cyprian  finished  his  martyr  course  in  the  time  of  the  Emperor  Decius  :  but  there  was 
a  long  interval  between  Aurelian  and  Decius.  For  many  emperors  reigned  after  the  death 
of  Decius,  to  whom  at  last  Aurelian  succeeded  on  the  throne.  Therefore  this  is  by  far  the 
most  ancient  of  all  synods.  In  it  moreover  above  eighty-four  bishops  were  gathered  to- 
gether, and  considered  the  question  as  to  what  was  to  be  done  about  the  baptism  of  those 
who  came  to  the  Church  after  abandoning  their  heresies,  and  of  schismatics  who  returned 
to  the  Church." 


1  Johnson.     Clergyman's  Vade  Mecam,    Notes  in  loc. 
3  Baronius,    Anml.  acl  ann.,  692. 


a  Asseman.    Bib.  Jur.  Orient.    Tom.  I.,  p.  414. 
1  Hefele.    Hist.  Councils,  Vol.  V.,  p.  224,  note  2. 


THE    SYNOD    HELD    AT    CARTHAGE    OVER    WHICH    PRESIDED    THE 
GREAT  AND  HOLY  MARTYR  CYPRIAN,  BISHOP  OF  CARTHAGE. 


A.D.  257. 


(Found  in  Beveridge,  Synodicon,  Tom.  I.,  j»j>.  365,  and  in  Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia, 
Tom.  I.,  col.  786.) 


When  very  many  bishops  were  met  to- 
gether at  Carthage  on  the  Calends  of  Sep- 
tember from  the  province  of  Africa,  Numidia 
and  Mauritania,  with  the  presbyters  and 
deacons  (the  greater  part  of  the  people  being 
likeAvise  present)  and  when  the  holy  letters 
of  Jubaianus  to  Cyprian  had  been  read,  and 
Cyprian's  answers  to  Jubaianus,  concerning 
heretical  baptisms,  as  well  as  what  the  same 
Jubaianus   afterwards   wrote  to   Cyprian, 

Cyprian  said  :  Ye  have  heard,  my  dearly 
beloved  colleagues,  what  our  fellow  bishop 
Jubaianus  has  written  to  me,  taking  counsel 
of  my  littleness  concerning  the  illicit  and 
profane  baptisms  of  heretics,  and  the  an- 
swer which  I  made  him ;  being  of  the  same 
opinion  as  we  have  been  on  former  occasions, 
that  heretics  coming  to  the  Church  should 
be  baptized  and  sanctified  with  the  Church's 
baptism.  Moreover  there  has  been  read  to 
you  also  the  other  letter  of  Jubaianus,  in 
which  answering  for  his  sincere  and  pious 
devotion  to  our  letter,  not  only  he  agrees 
therewith  but  offered  thanks  that  he  has 
been  so  instructed  by  it.  It  only  remains 
therefore  that  we,  each  one  of  us,  one  by 
one,  say  what  our  mind  is  in  this  matter, 
without  condemning  any  one  or  removing 
any  one  from  the  right  of  communion  who 
does  not  agree  with  us. 


For  no  one  [of  us !]  has  set  himself  up  [to 
be]  bishop  [of  bishops],1  or  attempted  with 
tyrannical  dread  to  force  his  colleagues  to 
obedience  to  him,  since  every  bishop  has,  for 
the  license  of  liberty  and  power,  his  own 
will,  and  as  he  cannot  be  judged  by  another, 
so  neither  can  he  judge  another.  But  we 
await  the  judgment  of  our  universal  Lord, 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  one  and  alone 
hath  the  power,  both  of  advancing  us  in 
the  governance  of  his  Church,  and  of  judging 
of  our  actions  [in  that  position]. 


[The  bishops  then  one  by  one  declared 
against  heretical  baptism.2  Last  of  all  (col. 
796)]  : 

Cyprian,  the  Confessor  and  Martyr  of 
Carthage,  said :  The  letter  which  was  written 
to  Jubaianus,  my  colleague,  most  fully  set 
forth  my  opinion,  that  heretics  who,  ac- 
cording to  the  evangelical  and  apostolic  wit- 
ness, are  called  adversaries  of  Christ's  and 
anti-Christs,  when  they  come  to  the  Church, 
should  be  baptized  with  the  one  (unico)  bap- 
tism of  the  Church,  that  they  may  become 
instead  of  adversaries  friends,  and  Chris- 
tians instead  of  Antichrists. 


NOTES. 


ZoNAEAS. 


These  are  the  opinions  therefore  of  the 
fathers,  •which  assembled  in  council  with  the 
great  Cyprian :  but  they  do  not  apply  to  all 
heretics  nor  to  all  schismatics.  For  the  Sec- 
ond Ecumenical  Council,  as  we  have  just  said 
[i.e.  in  the  Preface  he  has  placed  to  the  acts 
of  the  synod.  Vide  L.  and  C,  Cone.,  Tom.  i., 
col.  801]  makes  an  exception  of  some  heretics, 
and  give  its  sanction  to  their  reception  without 
baptism,  only  requiring  their  anointing  with 
the  holy  chrism,  and  then  anathematizing  at 
the  same  time  their  own  and  all  heresies. 


Balsam  on  does  not  print  the  acts  of  the 
Council  at  all  but  only  the  letter  of  St.  Cyprian 
(Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  I.,  col. 
799.)  I  have  not  thought  it  worth  while  to 
place  here  the  remarks  of  the  eighty-six  bish- 
ops, u>s  pr)  avajKalai,  ola  firj8e.  ivepyovaai,  to  quote 

Zonaras's  words. 

Binius. 

The  allusion  here  is  to  the  decree  of  Stephen, 
who  was  wont,  according  to  the  custom  of  his 
elders,  to  be  styled  "  Bishop  of  bishops,"  and 
because  he  had  acrimoniously  threatened  ex- 
communication to  all  not  agreeing  with  him. 


1  These  vrords  are  omitted  in  Zonaras's  Greek !    The  very  gist 
Of  the  matter  for  the  Easterns. 
a  These  will  be  found  translated  in  full  in  the  Oxford  "  Library 


of  the  Fathers,"  Vol.  17.  "  St.  Cyprian's  Epistles,"  p.  286  ;  also 
in  the  American  reprint  of  the  "  Ante-Nicene  Fathers,"  Vol.  V. 
"  Hippolitue,  Cyprian,  etc.,"  p.  565. 


518 


CARTHAGE  UNDER  CYPRIAN.     A.D.  257 


On  the  disputed  historical  fact  as  to  whether 
St.  Cyprian  died  in  or  out  of  the  communion 
of  the  See  of  Rome  the  reader  will  do  well  to 
consult  Puller,  The  Primitive  Saints  and  the  See 
of  Rome. 


I  place  here  St.  Cyprian's  Seventieth  Epis- 
tle in  the  Oxford  Translation  {Epistle  of  St. 
Cyprian,  pp.  232  ct  seqq.).  This  letter  is  ad- 
dressed to  Januarius,  Satterninus,  etc.,  and  is 
headed  in  Beveridge's  Synodicon  "  Canon  I." 


EPISTLE  LXX. 

Cyprian,  Liberalis,  Caldonius,  etc.,  to  their  brethren  Januarius,  etc.     Greeting. 


When  we  were  together  in  council,  dear- 
est brethren,  we  read  the  letter  which  you 
addressed  to  us  respecting  those  who  are 
thought  to  be  baptized  by  heretics  and 
schismatics,  whether,  when  they  come  to 
the  one  true  Catholic  Church,  they  ought 
to  be  baptized.  Wherein,  although  ye  your- 
selves also  hold  the  Catholic  rule  in  its 
truth  and  fixedness,  yet  since,  out  of  our 
mutual  affection,  ye  have  thought  good  to 
consult  us,  we  deliver  not  our  sentence  as 
though  new  but,  by  a  kindred  harmony,  we 
unite  with  you  in  that  long  since  settled  by 
our  predecessors,  and  observed  by  us ;  think- 
ing, namely,  and  holding  for  certain,  that 
no  one  can  be  baptized  without  the  Church, 
in  that  there  is  one  Baptism  appointed  in 
the  holy  Church,  and  it  is  written,  the  Lord 
himself  speaking,  "  They  have  forsaken  me, 
the  Fountain  of  living  water,  and  hewed 
them  out  broken  cisterns  that  can  hold  no 
water."  Again,  holy  Scripture  admonishes 
us,  and  says,  "  Keep  thee  from  the  strange 
water,  and  drink  not  from  a  fountain  of 
strange  water."  The  water  then  must  first 
be  cleansed  and  sanctified  by  the  priest, 
that  it  may  be  able,  by  Baptism  therein,  to 
wash  away  the  sins  of  the  baptized,  for  the 
Lord  says  by  the  prophet  Ezekiel,  "  Then 
will  I  sprinkle  clean  water  upon  you,  and 
ye  shall  be  cleansed  from  all  your  filthiness, 
and  from  all  your  idols  will  I  cleanse  you ; 
a  new  heart  also  will  I  give  you,  and  a  new 
spirit  will  I  put  within  yon."  But  how  can 
he  cleanse  and  sanctify  the  water,  who  is 
himself  unclean,  and  with  whom  the  Spirit 
is  not  ?  whereas  the  Lord  says  in  Numbers, 
"  And  Avhatsoever  the  unclean  person  touch- 
eth  shall  be  unclean."  Or  how  can  he  that 
baptizeth  give  remission  of  sins  to  another, 
who  cannot  himself  free  himself  from  his 
own  sins,  out  of  the  Church  ? 

Moreover,  the  very  interrogatory  which  is 
put  in  Baptism,  is  a  witness  of  the  truth. 
For  when  we  say,  "Dost  thou  believe  in 


eternal  life,  and  remission  of  sins  through 
the  holy  Church  ?  "  we  mean,  that  remis- 
sion of  sins  is  not  given,  except  in  the 
Church  ;  but  that,  with  heretics,  where  the 
Church  is  not,  sins  cannot  be  remitted. 
They,  therefore,  who  claim  that  heretics  can 
baptize,  let  them  either  change  the  inter- 
rogatory, or  maintain  the  truth  ;  unless  in- 
deed they  ascribe  a  Church  also  to  those 
who  they  contend  have  Baptism. 

Anointed  also  must  he  of  necessity  be, 
who  is  baptized,  that  having  received  the 
chrism — that  is,  unction,  he  may  be  the 
anointed  of  God,  and  have  within  him  the 
grace  of  Christ.  Moreover,  it  is  the  Eu- 
charist through  which  the  baptized  are 
anointed,  the  oil  sanctified  on  the  altar. 
But  he  cannot  sanctify  the  creature  of  oil, 
who  has  neither  altar  nor  church.  Whence 
neither  can  the  spiritual  unction  be  with 
heretics,  since  it  is  acknowledged  that  the 
oil  cannot  be  sanctified  nor  the  Eucharist 
celebrated  among  them.  But  we  ought  to 
know  and  remember  that  it  is  written,  "  Let 
not  the  oil  of  a  sinner  anoint  my  head  ; " 
which  the  Holy  Ghost  forewarned  in  the 
Psalms,  lest  any,  quitting  the  track,  and 
wandering  out  of  the  path  of  truth,  be 
anointed  by  heretics  and  adversaries  of 
Christ.  Moreover,  when  baptized,  what 
kind  of  prayer  can  a  profane  priest  and  a 
sinner  offer  ?  in  that  it  is  written,  "  God 
heareth  not  a  sinner  ;  but  if  any  man  be  a 
worshipper  of  God,  and  doeth  his  will,  him 
he  heareth." 

But  who  can  give  what  himself  hath  not  ? 
or  how  can  he  perform  spiritual  acts,  who 
hath  himself  lost  the  Holy  Spirit  ?  Where- 
fore he  is  to  be  baptized  and  received,  who 
comes  uninitiated  to  the  Church,  that  within 
he  may  be  hallowed  through  the  holy  ;  for 
it  is  written,  "Be  ye  holy,  for  I  am  holy, 
saith  the  Lord."  So  that  he  who  has  been 
seduced  into  error  and  washed  without 
should,  in  the  true  Baptism  of  the  Church, 


CARTHAGE  UNDER  CYPRIAN.     A.D.  257 


519 


put  off  this  very  tiling  also  ;  that  he,  a  man 
coming  to  God,  while  seeking  for  a  priest, 
fell,  through  the  deceit  of  error,  upon  one 
profane.  But  to  acknowledge  any  case 
where  they  have  baptized,  is  to  approve  the 
baptism  of  heretics  and  schismatics. 

For  neither  can  part  of  what  they  do  be 
void  and  part  avail.  If  he  could  baptize,  he 
could  also  give  the  Holy  Ghost.  But  if  he 
cannot  give  the  Holy  Ghost  because,  being 
set  without,  he  is  not  with  the  Holy  Ghost, 
neither  can  he  baptize  any  that  cometh : 
for  that  there  is  both  one  Baptism,  and  one 
Holy  Ghost,  and  one  Church,  founded  by 
Christ  the  Lord  upon  Peter,  through  an 
original  and  principle  of  unity;  so  it  re- 
sults, that  since  all  among  them  is  void  and 
false,  nothing  that  they  have  done  ought  to 
be  approved  by  us.  For  what  can  be  rati- 
fied and  confirmed  by  God,  which  they  do 
whom  the  Lord  calls  his  enemies  and  ad- 
versaries, propounding  in  his  Gospel,  "  He 
that  is  not  with  me,  is  against  me  ;  and  he 
that  gathereth  not  with  me,  scattereth." 
And  the  blessed  Apostle  John  also,  keeping 


the  commandments  and  precepts  of  the 
Lord,  has  written  in  his  Epistle,  "  Ye  have 
heard  that  Antichrist  shall  come ;  even 
now  are  there  many  Antichrists,  whereby 
we  know  that  it  is  the  last  time.  They 
went  out  from  us,  but  were  not  of  us  ;  for 
if  they  had  been  of  us,  they  would  no  doubt 
have  continued  with  us."  Whence  we,  too, 
ought  to  infer  and  consider,  whether  they 
who  are  the  adversaries  of  the  Lord,  and 
are  called  Antichrists,  can  give  the  grace  of 
Christ.  Wherefore  we  who  are  with  the 
Lord,  and  who  hold  the  unity  of  the  Lord, 
and  according  to  this  vouchsafement  admin- 
ister his  priesthood  in  the  Church,  ought  to 
repudiate  and  reject  and  account  as  pro- 
fane, whatever  his  adversaries  and  Anti- 
christs do  ;  and  to  those  who,  coming  from 
error  and  wickedness,  acknowledge  the  true 
faith  of  the  one  Church,  we  should  impart 
the  reality  of  unity  and  faith  by  all  the  sac- 
raments of  Divine  grace. 

We  bid  you,  dearest  brethren,  ever  heart- 
ily farewell. 


THE  SEVENTH  ECUMENICAL  COUNCIL. 


THE  SECOND  COUNCIL  OF  NICE. 


A.D.  787. 

Emperors. — Constantine  VI.  and  Ieene. 
Pope.  — Hadkian. 

Elenclius. 


Introduction. 

The  Sacra  to  Hadrian. 

The  Sacra  read  at  Session  I. 

Extracts  from  the  Acts,  Session  I. 

Session  II. 

Session  III. 

Session  IV. 

Session  VI.  containing  the  Epitome  of  the 
decree  of  the  iconoclastic  Conciliabidum. 

Excursus  On  the  Concilidbulum. 

The  dogmatic  Decree  of  the  Synod. 

Excursus  On  the  present  teaching  of  the 
Latin  and  Greek  Churches  on  the  subject  of 
images. 


The  Canons,  with  the  Ancient  Epitome 
and  Notes. 

Synodal  Letter  to  the  Emperors. 

Excursus  On  the  Ttoo  Letters  of  Gregory 
II.  to  the  Emperor  Leo. 

Excursus  On  the  Reception  of  the  Seventh 
Council. 

Excursus  On  the  Council  of 'Frankfort, 
A.D.  791 

Excursus  On  the  Convention  of  Paris, 
A.D.  825. 

Historical  Note  On  the  so-called  "Eighth 
General  Council "  and  subsequent  councils. 


INTRODUCTION. 

Gibbon  thus  describes  the  Seventh  Ecumenical  Council  of  the  Christian  Church:  "The 
decrees  were  framed  by  the  president 1  Tarasius,  and  ratified  by  the  acclamations  and  sub- 
scriptions of  three  hundred  and  fifty  bishops.  They  unanimously  pronounced  that  the  wor- 
ship of  images  is  agreeable  to  Scripture  and  reason,  to  the  Fathers  and  councils  of  the  Church ; 
but  they  hesitated  whether  that  worship  be  relative  or  direct ;  whether  the  godhead  and  the 
figure  of  Christ  be  entitled  to  the  same  mode  of  adoration.2  Of  this  second  Nicene  Council 
the  acts  are  still  extant ;  a  curious  monument  of  superstition  and  ignorance,  of  falsehood  and 
folly."     (Decline  and  Fall,  chapter  xlix.) 

And  this  has  been  read  as  history,  and  has  passed  as  such  in  the  estimation  of  the  over- 
whelming majority  of  educated  English-speaking  people  for  several  generations,  and  yet  it 
is  a  statement  as  full  of  absolute  and  inexcusable  errors  as  the  passage  in  another  part  of 
the  same  work  which  the  late  Bishop  Lightfoot  so  unmercifully  exposed,  and  which  the  most 
recent  editor,  Bury,  has  taken  pains  to  correct. 

I  do  not  know  whether  it  is  worth  while  to  do  so,  but  perhaps  it  may  be  as  well  to  state, 
that  whatever  may  be  his  opinion  of  the  truths  of  the  conclusions  arrived  at  by  the  council, 
no  impartial  reader  can  fail  to  recognize  the  profound  learning 3  of  the  assembly,  the  singular 
acumen  displayed  in  the  arguments  employed,  and  the  remarkable  freedom  from  what  Gibbon 
and  many  others  would  consider  "  superstition."  So  radical  is  this  that  Gibbon  would  have 
noticed  it  had  he  read  the  acts  of  the  synod  he  is  criticising  (which  we  have  good  reason  for 
believing  that  he  never  did).  There  he  would  have  found  the  Patriarch  declaring  that  at  that 
time  the  venerable  images  worked  no  miracles,  a  statement  that  would  be  made  by  no  prelate 
of  the  Latin  or  Greek  Church  to-day,  even  in  the  light  of  the  nineteenth  century. 

As  I  have  noted  in  the  previous  pages  my  task  is  not  that  of  a  controversialist.  To  me 
at  present  it  is  a  matter  of  no  concern  whether  the  decision  of  the  council  is  true  or  false. 
I  shall  therefore  strictly  confine  myself  to  two  points  :  1.  That  the  Council  was  Ecumenical. 
2.  What  its  decision  was ;  explaining  the  technical  meaning  of  the  Greek  words  employed 
during  this  controversy  and  finally  incorporated  in  the  decree. 


1.  This  Council  -was  certainly  Ecumenical. 

It  seems  strange  that  any  person  familiar  with  the  facts  of  the  case  could  for  a  moment 
entertain  a  doubt  as  to  the  ecumenical  character  of  the  council  which  met  at  Nice  in  787. 

(a)  It  was  called  by  the  Boman  Emperors  to  be  an  Ecumenical  Council.  Vide  letter  of 
Tarasius. 

(6)  It  was  called  with  the  approval  of  the  Pope  (not  like  I.  Constantinople,  without  his 
knowledge ;  or  like  Chalcedon,  contrary  to  his  expressed  wish),  and  two  papal  legates  were 
present  at  its  deliberations  and  signed  its  decrees. 

(c)  The  Patriarch  of  Constantinople  was  present  in  person. 

(d)  The  other  Patriarchates  were  represented,  although  on  account  of  the  Moslem  tyranny 
the  Patriarchs  could  not  attend  in  person,  nor  could  they  even  send  proctors. 

(e)  The  decrees  were  adopted  by  an  unanimous  vote  of  the  three  hundred  and  fifty  bishops. 


1  Who  was  possibly  at  least  not  the  president,  vide  Michaud, 
Sept.  Cone.  (Ecumeniques,  p.  330. 

2  Worship  is  "  relative  "  or  "  absolute,"  what  Gibbon  means  by 
"direct"  would  be  hard  to  say.  How  entirely  false  the  whole 
statement  is,  Gibbon  himself  would  have  recognized  had  he  read 
the  acts. 

3  Dr.  Neale  complains  that  the  acts  display  a  painful  lack  of 
critical  knowledge  and  that  several  spurious  passages  are  attrib- 


uted to  the  Fathers.  But  I  confess  this  does  not  seem  to  me  either 
surprising  or  disgraceful.  The  attributing  of  books,  even  in  our 
critical  days,  to  persons  who  were,  not  their  authors  is  not  so  un- 
common as  to  make  us  wonder  such  a  thing  might  have  occurred 
in  such  stormy  times,  when  learning  of  this  sort  must  have  suf- 
fered by  the  adversities  of  the  Church  and  State,  the  Iconoclastic 
persecutions  and  the  Moslem  incursions. 


524  II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


(/)  They  were  immediately  received  in  all  the  four  Eastern  Patriarchates.1 

(g)  They  were  immediately  accepted  by  the  Pope. 

(h)  For  a  full  thousand  years  they  have  been  received  by  the  Latin  and  Greek  Churches 
with  but  a  few  exceptions  altogether  insignificant,  save  the  Frankisk  kingdom. 

In  the  face  of  such  undisputed  facts,  it  would  be  strange  were  anyone  to  doubt  the  his- 
torical fact  that  the  Second  Council  of  Nice  is  one  of  the  Ecumenical  Councils  of  the  Catho- 
lic Church,  and  indeed  so  far  as  I  am  aware  none  have  done  so  except  such  as  have  been 
forced  into  this  position  for  doctrinal  consistency. 

Nor  have  all  Protestants  allowed  their  judgment  to  be  warped  in  this  matter.  As  a 
sample  I  may  quote  from  that  stanch  Protestant  whom  Queen  Elizabeth  appointed  a  chaplain 
in  ordinary  in  1598,  and  who  in  1610  was  made  Dean  of  Gloucester,  the  profoundly  learned 
Richard  Field.  In  his  famous  "Book  of  the  Church "  (Book  V.  chap,  lj.),  he  says :  "  These" 
[six,  which  he  had  just  described]  "  were  all  the  lawful  General  Councils  (lawful,  I  say,  both 
in  their  beginning  and  proceeding  and  continuance)  that  ever  were  holden  in  the  Christian 
Church,  touching  matters  of  faith.  For  the  Seventh,  which  is  the  Second  of  Nice,  was  not 
called  about  any  question  of  faith  but  of  manners.  ...  So  that  there  are  but  Seven 
General  Councils  that  the  whole  Church  acknowledgeth,  called  to  determine  matters  of  faith 
and  manners.  For  the  rest  that  were  holden  afterwards,  which  our  adversaries  [the  Roman 
Catholics]  would  have  to  be  acknowledged  general,  they  are  not  only  rejected  by  us  but  by 
the  Grecians  also,  as  not  general,  but  patriarchal  only,  etc." 

Of  course  there  are  a  number  of  writers  (principally  of  the  Anglican  Communion),  who 
have  argued  thus :  "  The  doctrine  taught  by  the  Second  Council  of  Nice  we  reject,  ergo  it 
cannot  have  been  an  Ecumenical  Council  of  the  Catholic  Church."  And  they  have  then  gone 
on  to  prove  their  conclusion.  With  such  writers  I  have  no  concern.  My  simple  contention 
is  that  the  Council  is  admitted  by  all  to  have  been  representative  of  East  and  "West,  and  to 
have  been  accepted  for  a  thousand  years  as  such,  and  to  be  to-day  accepted  as  Ecumenical  by 
the  Latin  and  Greek  Churches.  If  its  doctrines  are  false,  then  one  of  the  Ecumenical 
Synods  set  forth  false  doctrine,  a  statement  which  should  give  no  trouble,  so  far  as  I  can  un- 
derstand, to  anyone  who  does  not  hold  the  necessary  infallibility  of  Ecumenical  Synods.2 

Among  those  who  have  argued  against  the  ecumenical  character  of  the  Seventh  Council 
there  are,  however,  two  whose  eminent  learning  and  high  standing  demand  a  consideration 
of  anything  they  may  advance  on  any  subject  they  treat  of,  these  are  the  Rev.  John  Mason 
Neale  and  the  Rev.  Sir  William  Palmer. 

Dr.  Neale  considers  the  matter  at  some  length  in  a  foot-note  to  his  History  of  the  Eastern 
Church  (Vol.  II.,  pp.  132-135),  but  I  think  it  not  improper  to  remark  that  the  author  ingen- 
uously confesses  in  this  very  note  that  if  he  came  to  the  conclusion  that  the  council  was 
ecumenical,  "  it  would  be  difficult  to  clear  our  own  Church  from  the  charge  of  heresy." 
Entertaining  such  an  opinion  at  the  start,  his  conclusion  could  hardly  be  unbiassed. 

The  only  argument  which  is  advanced  in  this  note  which  is  different  from  those  of  other 
opponents  of  the  Council,  is  that  it  had  not  the  authentication  of  a  subsequent  Ecumenical 
Synod.  The  argument  seems  to  me  so  extraordinary  that  I  think  Dr.  Neale's  exact  words 
should  be  cited  :  "  In  the  first  place,  we  may  remark  that  the  Second  Council  of  Niceea  wants 
one  mark  of  authority,  shared  according  to  the  more  general  belief  by  the  six — according  to 
the  opinions  which  an  English  Churchman  must  necessarily  embrace  by  the  first  five  Coun- 


1  "It  is  certain,"  confesses  Dr.Neale  (History  of the  Holy  East- 
ern Church,  Vol.  II.,  p.  133  ;  in  his  attempt  to  overthrow  the  au- 
thority of  this  council)  "  that  Politian  approved  (S.  Theod.  Stud. 
Ep.  xviij.)  although  he  was  not  present  at  the  Council  of  Niceea ; 
aud  the  controversy,  which  had  never  much  disturbed  Africa,  may 
henceforth  be  considered  as  terminated  in  the  Diocese  of  Alex- 
andria." 


2  As  a  sample  of  all  that  bigotry  and  dishonesty  can  do  when 
writing  on  such  a  subject,  the  reader  is  referred  to  a  little  hook 


cite. 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787  525 


cils — its  recognition  as  Ecumenical  by  a  later  Council  undoubtedly  so."  But  surely  tliis 
involves  an  absurdity,  for  if  it  is  not  known  whether  the  hist  one  is  ecumenical  or  no,  how  will 
its  approval  of  the  next  to  the  last  give  that  council  any  certainty  ?  If  III.  Constantinople 
is  doubtful  being  the  sixth,  because  there  is  no  seventh  to  have  confirmed  it ;  then  II.  Con- 
stantinople, the  fifth,  is  doubtful  because  it  has  only  been  confirmed  by  a  synod  itself  doubt- 
ful and  so  on,  which  is  absurd.  The  test  of  the  ecumenicity  of  a  council  is  not  its  accept- 
ance by  a  subsequent  synod,  but  its  acceptance  by  the  whole  Church,  and  this  Dr.  Neale 
frankly  confesses  is  the  case  with  regard  to  II.  Nice  :  "  It  cannot  be  denied,"  he  admits, 
"  that  at  the  present  day  both  the  Eastern  and  the  Latin  Churches  receive  it  as  Ecumenical " 
(p.  132).  He  might  have  added,  "  and  have  done  so  without  any  controversy  on  the  subject 
for  nearly  a  thousand  years." 

I  do  not  think  there  is  any  need  of  my  delaying  longer  over  Dr.  Neale's  note,  which  I 
have  noticed  at  all  only  because  of  his  profound  scholarship,  and  not  because  on  this  par* 
ticular  point  I  thought  he  had  thrown  any  new  light  upon  the  matter,  nor  urged  any  argu- 
ment really  calling  for  an  answer. 

Sir  William  Palmer's  argument  (A  Treatise  on  the  Church  of  Christ,  Pt.  IV.,  Chapter  X., 
Sect.  IV.)  is  one  of  much  greater  force,  and  needs  an  answer.  He  points  out  how,  long  after 
the  Council  of  Nice,  the  number  of  the  General  Councils  was  still  spoken  of  as  being  Six, 
and  that  in  some  instances  this  council  is  referred  to  as  the  "  pseudo  "  General  Council  of 
Nice.  Now  at  first  sight  this  argument  seems  to  be  of  great  force.  But  upon  further  con- 
sideration it  will  be  seen  to  be  after  all  of  no  great  weight.  We  may  not  be  able  to  explain, 
nor  are  we  called  upon  to  do  so,  why  in  certain  cases  writers  chose  still  to  speak  of  Six 
instead  of  Seven  General  Councils,  but  we  would  point  out  that  the  same  continuance  of  the 
old  expression  can  be  found  with  regard  to  others  of  the  General  Councils.  For  example, 
St.  Gregory  the  Great  says  that  he  "revered  the  four  Ecumenical  Councils  as  he  did  the 
four  Gospels,"  but  the  fifth  Ecumenical  Synod  had  been  held  a  number  of  years  before. 
Will  anyone  pretend  from  this  to  draw  the  conclusion  that  at  that  time  the  Ecumenical 
character  of  the  Fifth  Synod  (II.  Constantinople)  was  not  recognized  at  Kome  ?  Moreover, 
among  the  instances  cited  (and  there  are  but  a  very  few  all  told)  one  of  them  is  fatal  to  the 
argument.  For  if  Pope  Hadrian  in  871  still  speaks  of  only  six  Ecumenical  Synods,  he  omits 
two  (according  to  Roman  count),  for  this  date  is  after  the  synod  which  deposed  Photius — a 
synod  rejected  indeed  afterwards  by  the  Greeks,  but  always  accepted  by  the  Latins  as  the 
Eighth  of  the  Ecumenical  Councils.  Would  Sir  William  pretend  for  an  instant  that  Hadrian 
and  the  Church  of  Rome  did  not  recognize  that  Council  as  Ecumenical  and  as  the  Eighth 
Synod?  He  could  not,  for  on  page  208  he  ingenuously  confesses  that  that  Council  "had 
been  approved  and  confirmed  by  that  Pope." 

But  after  all,  the  contention  fails  in  its  very  beginning,  for  Sir  William  frankly  recog- 
nizes that  the  Popes  from  the  first  espoused  the  cause  of  the  council  and  were  ready  to 
defend  it.  Now  this  involved  the  acknowledgment  of  its  ecumenical  character,  for  it  was 
called  as  an  Ecumenical  Synod,  this  we  expressly  learn  from  the  letter  of  Tarasius  to  the 
other  Eastern  Patriarchs  (Labbe,  Cone.,  Tom.  VII.,  col.  165),  from  the  letter  of  the  Emperor 
and  Empress  to  the  bishops  throughout  the  empire  (L.  and  C,  Cone.,  Tom.  VII.,  col.  53), 
and  (above  all)  from  the  witness  of  the  Council  itself,  assuming  the  style  of  the  "  Holy  Ecu- 
menical Synod."     In  the  face  of  such  evidence  any  further  proof  is  surely  uncalled  for. 

We  come  now  to  the  only  other  argument  brought  against  the  ecumenical  character  of 
this  council — to  wit,  that  many  writers,  even  until  after  the  beginning  of  the  XVIth  century, 
call  the  Seventh  a  "pseudo-Council."  But  surely  this  proves  too  much,  for  it  would  seem 
to  imply  that  even  down  to  that  time  the  cultus  of  images  was  not  established  in  the  West, 
a  proposition  too  ridiculous  to  be  defended  by  anyone.     It  is  indeed  worthy  of  notice  that 


526  II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


all  the  authors  cited  are  Frankisk,  (1)  the  Annates  Francorum  (a.d.  808)  in  the  continuation 
of  the  same  (a.d.  814),  in  an  anonymous  life  of  Charlemagne,  and  the  Annates  written  after 
819  ;  (2)  Eginhard  in  his  Annates  Francorum  (a.d.  829)  ;  (3)  the  Gallican  bishops  at  Paris, 
824  ; 1  (4)  Hincmar  of  Bhehns  ;  (5)  Ado,  bishop  of  Vienne  (died  875)  ;  (6)  Anastasius  ac- 
knowledges that  the  French  had  not  accepted  the  veneration  of  the  sacred  images  ;  (7)  The 
Chronicle  of  St.  Bertinus  (after  884) ;  (8)  The  Annates  Francorum  after  the  council  still 
speak  of  it  as  pseudo  ;  (9)  Eegino,  Abbot  of  Prurn  (circa  910)  ;  (10)  the  Chronicle  of  St. 
Bertinus,  of  the  Xth  Century.  (11)  Hermanus  Contractus  :  (12)  the  author  who  continued 
the  Gestes  Francorum  to  a.d.  1165  ;  (13)  Roger  Hoverden  (a.d.  1204)  ;  (14)  Conrade  a  Lichte- 
nau,  Abbot  of  Urspurg  (circa  1230) ;  (15)  Matthew  of  Westminster. 

No  doubt  to  these,  given  in  Palmer,  who  has  made  much  use  of  Lannoy,  others  could  be 
added  ;  but  they  are  enough  to  shew  that  the  council  was  very  little  known,  and  that  none 
of  these  writers  had  ever  seen  its  acts. 

Sir  William  is  of  opinion  that  by  what  precedes  in  his  book  he  has  "  proved  that  for  at 
least  five  centuries  and  a  half  the  Council  of  Nice  remained  rejected  in  the  Western  Church." 
I  venture  to  think  that  the  most  he  has  proved  is  that  during  that  period  of  time  he  has  been 
able  to  find  fifteen  individuals  who  for  one  reason  or  another  wrote  rejecting  that  council, 
that  is  to  say  three  in  a  century,  a  number  which  does  not  seem  quite  sufficient  to  make  the 
foundation  of  so  considerable  a  generalization  as  "the  Western  Church."  The  further  con- 
clusion of  Sir  William,  I  think,  every  scholar  will  reject  as  simply  preposterous,  viz. :  "In 
fact  the  doctrine  of  the  adoration  of  images  [by  which  he  means  the  doctrine  taught  by  the 
II.  Council  of  Nice]  was  never  received  in  the  West,  except  where  the  influence  of  the  Roman 
See  was  predominant "  (p.  211). 

Sir  William  is  always,  however,  honest,  and  the  following  quotation  which  he  himself 
makes  from  Cardinal  Bellarmine  may  well  go  far  toward  explaining  the  erroneous  or  imper- 
fect statements  he  has  so  learnedly  and  laboriously  gathered  together.  "  Bellarmine  says  : 
'  It  is  very  credible  that  St.  Thomas,  Alexander  of  Hales,  and  other  scholastic  doctors  had 
not  seen  the  second  synod  of  Nice,  nor  the  eighth  general  synod  ;'  he  adds  that  they  'were 
long  in  obscurity,  and  "were  first  published  in  our  own  age,  as  may  be  known  from  their  not 
being  extant  in  the  older  volumes  of  the  councils ;  and  St.  Thomas  and  the  other  ancient 
schoolmen  never  make  any  mention  of  this  Nicene  Synod.'  (Bell.  De  Imag.  Sanct.  Lib.  II. 
cap.  xxij.)" 

2.    What  the  Council  decreed. 

The  council  decreed  that  similar  veneration  and  honour  should  be  paid  to  the  represen- 
tations of  the  Lord  and  of  the  Saints  as  was  accustomed  to  be  paid  to  the  "laurata"  and 
tablets  representing  the  Christian  emperors,  to  wit,  that  they  should  be  bowed  to,  and  saluted 
with  kisses,  and  attended  with  lights  and  the  offering  of  incense.2  But  the  Council  was  most 
explicit  in  declaring  that  this  was  merely  a  veneration  of  honour  and  affection,  such  as  can 
be  given  to  the  creature,  and  that  under  no  circumstances  could  the  adoration  of  divine  wor- 
ship be  given  to  them  but  to  God  alone. 

The  Greek  language  has  in  this  respect  a  great  advantage  over  the  Hebrew,  the  Latin 
and  the  English  ;  it  has  a  word  which  is  a  general  word  and  is  properly  used  of  the  affection- 
ate regard  and  veneration  shown  to  any  person  or  thing,  whether  to  the  divine  Creator  or  to 
any  of  his  creatures,  this  word  is  TrpoaKvvvo-is  ;  it  has  also  another  word  which  can  properly  be 
used  to  denote  only  the  worship  due  to  the  most  high  God,  this  word  is  Xarpda.  When  then 
the  Council  defined  that  the  worship  of  "latria"was  never  to  be  given  to  any  but  God  alone, 

>  The  true  date  is  825.  s  Vide  Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  torn,  vii.,  col.  59, 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787  527 

it  eut  off  all  possibility  for  idolatry,  m&i-iolatry,  iconolatry,  or  any  other  "  latry  "  except  "  tkeo- 
latry."  If  therefore  any  of  these  other  "  latries  "  exist  or  ever  have  existed,  they  exist  or 
have  existed  not  in  accordance  with,  but  in  defiance  of,  the  decree  of  the  Second  Council  of 
Nice. 

But  unfortunately,  as  I  have  said,  we  have  neither  in  Hebrew,  Latin,  nor  English  any 
word  with  this  restricted  meaning,  and  therefore  when  it  became  necessary  to  translate  the 
Greek  acts  and  the  decree,  great  difficulty  was  experienced,  and  by  the  use  of  "  adoro  "  as 
the  equivalent  of  Trpoo-Kweui  many  were  scandalized,  thinking  that  it  was  divine  adoration 
which  they  were  to  give  to  the  sacred  images,  which  they  knew  would  be  idolatry.  The  same 
trouble  is  found  in  rendering  into  English  the  acts  and  decrees  ;  for  while  indeed  properly 
speaking  "  worship  "  no  more  means  necessarily  divine  worship  in  English  than  "  adoratio  " 
does  in  Latin  (e.g.  I.  Chr.  xxix.  20,  "All  the  congregation  bowed  down  their  heads  and 
worshipped  the  Lord  and  the  King"  [i.e.  Solomon]  ;  Luke  xiv.  10,  "Then  shalt  thou  have 
worship  in  the  presence  of  them  that  sit  at  meat  with  thee"),  yet  to  the  popular  mind  "the 
worship  of  images  "  is  the  equivalent  of  idolatry.  In  the  following  translations  I  have  uni- 
formly translated  as  follows  and  the  reader  from  the  English  will  know  what  the  word  is  in 
the  original. 

IIpocr/<weo),  to  venerate ;  rt/xao),  to  honour ;  Xinpzvw,  to  adore  ;  a<nrat,o[j.ai,  to  salute  ;  SoviWw, 
to  serve  ;  clkwv,  an  image. 

The  relative  force  of  Trpoo-Kvvncris  and  Xarpeia  cannot  better  be  set  forth  than  by  Archbishop 
Trench's  illustration  of  two  circles  having  the  same  centre,  the  larger  including  the  less 
(New  Testament  Synonyms,  sub  voce  Aarpevw). 

To  make  this  matter  still  clearer  I  must  ask  the  reader's  attention  to  the  use  of  the  words 
abadh  and  shachah  in  the  Hebrew ;  the  one  abadh,  which  finds,  when  used  with  reference  to 
God  or  to  false  gods  its  equivalent  in  Xarpevtn ;  the  other  shachah,  which  is  represented  by 
irpooKwio).  Now  in  the  Old  Testament  no  distinction  in  the  Hebrew  is  drawn  between  these 
words  when  applied  to  creator  or  creature.  The  one  denotes  service  primarily  for  hire  ;  the 
other  bowing  down  and  kissing  the  hand  to  any  in  salutation.  Both  words  are  constantly 
used  and  sometimes  refer  to  the  Creator  and  sometimes  to  the  creature — e.g.,  we  read  that 
Jacob  served  (abadh)  Laban  (Gen.  xxix.  20) ;  and  that  Joshua  commanded  the  people  not  to 
serve  the  gods  of  their  fathers  but  to  serve  (abadh)  the  Lord  (Josh.  xxiv.  14).  And  for  the 
use  of  shachah  the  following  may  suffice :  "  And  all  the  congregation  blessed  the  Lord  God 
of  their  fathers  and  bowed  down  their  heads  and  worshipped  (Hebrew,  shachah  ;  Greek,  -n-pocr- 
Kwiu> ;  Latin,  adoro)  the  Lord  and  the  King  "  (I.  Chr.  xxix.  20).  But  while  it  is  true  of 
the  Hebrew  of  the  Old  Testament  that  there  is  no  word  which  refers  alone  to  Divine  Worship 
this  is  not  true  of  the  Septuagint  Greek  nor  of  the  Greek  of  the  New  Testament,  for  in  both 
■n-poa-Kweoi  has  always  its  general  meaning,  sometimes  applying  to  the  creature  and  sometimes 
to  the  Creator  ;  but  Xarpevu)  is  used  to  denote  divine  worship  alone,  as  St.  Augustine  pointed 
out  long  ago. 

This  distinction  comes  out  very  clearly  in  the  inspired  translation  of  the  Hebrew  found 
in  Matthew  iv.  10,  "  Thou  shalt  worship  (-n-poo-KwrJcras)  the  Lord  thy  God,  and  him  only  shalt 
thou  serve  (-Wpewras)."  "Worship  "  was  due  indeed  to  God  above  all  but  not  exclusively  to 
him,  but  latria  is  to  be  given  to  "him  only."  1 

I  think  I  have  now  said  enough  to  let  the  reader  understand  the  doctrine  taught  by  the 
council  and  to  prove  that  in  its  decree  it  simply  adopted  the  technical  use  of  words  found  in 
the  Greek  of  the  Septuagint  and  of  the  New  Testament.  I  may  then  close  this  introduction 
with  a  few  remarks  upon  outward  acts  of  veneration  in  general. 

1  Vide  the  Synod's  Letter  to  the  Emperor  and  Empress. 


528  II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


Of  course,  the  outward  manifestation  in  bodily  acts  of  reverence  will  vary  with  times  and 
with  the  habits  of  peoples.  To  those  accustomed  to  hiss  the  earth  on  which  the  Emperor 
had  trodden,  it  would  be  natural  to  kiss  the  feet  of  the  image  of  the  King  of  Kings.  The 
same  is  manifestly  true  of  any  outward  acts  whatever,  such  as  bowing,  kneeling,  burning  of 
lights,  and  offering  of  incense.  All  these  when  offered  before  an  image  are,  according  to 
the  mind  of  the  Council,  but  outward  signs  of  the  reverence  due  to  that  which  the  image 
represents  and  pass  backward  to  the  prototype,  and  thus  it  defined,  citing  the  example  of 
the  seipent  in  the  wilderness,  of  which  we  read,  "For  he  that  turned  himself  toward  it  was 
not  saved  by  the  thing  that  he  saw,  but  by  thee,  that  art  the  Saviour  of  all "  (Wisdom  xvi. 
17).  If  anyone  feels  disposed  to  attribute  to  outward  acts  any  necessary  religious  value  he 
is  falling  back  into  Judaism,  and  it  were  well  for  him  to  remember  that  the  nod  which  the 
Quakers  adopted  out  of  protest  to  the  bow  of  Christians  was  once  the  expression  of  divine 
worship  to  the  most  sacred  idols  ;  that  in  the  Eastern  Church  the  priest  only  bows  before 
the  Lord  believed  to  be  present  in  the  Holy  Sacrament  while  he  prostrates  himself  before 
the  infidel  Sultan  ;  and  that  throughout  the  Latin  communion  the  acolytes  genuflect  before 
the  Bishop,  as  they  pass  him,  with  the  same  genuflection  that  they  give  to  the  Holy  Sacra- 
ment upon  the  Altar.  In  this  connexion  I  quote  in  closing  the  fine  satire  in  the  letter  of 
this  very  council  to  the  Emperor  and  Empress.  St.  Paul  "  says  of  Jacob  (Heb.  xi.  21),  '  He 
worshipped  the  top  of  his  staff,'  and  like  to  this  is  that  said  by  Gregory,  surnamed  the  theo- 
logian, '  Eevere  Bethlehem  and  worship  the  manger.'  But  who  of  those  truly  understanding 
the  Divine  Scriptures  would  suppose  that  here  was  intended  the  Divine  worship  of  latria  ? 
Such  an  opinion  could  only  be  entertained  by  an  idiot  or  one  ignorant  of  Scriptural  and 
Patristic  knowledge.  Would  Jacob  give  divine  worship  to  his  staff?  Or  would  Gregory,  the 
theologian,  give  command  to  worship  as  God  a  manger  ! "  x 

1  The  treatise  of  St.  John  Damascene  on  The  Holy  Images  has  very  recently  been  published  in  an  English  translation  by  M.  H, 
Allies.    (London.    Thos.  Baker,  1898.) 


THE  DIVINE1  SACRA-  SENT  BY  THE  EMPERORS  CONSTANTINE  AND 
IRENE  TO  THE  MOST  HOLY  AND  MOST  BLESSED  HADRIAN, 
POPE  OF  OLD  ROME. 


{Found  in  Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  VII.,  col.  33.) 


They  who  receive  the  dignity  of  the  em- 
pire, or  the  honour  of  the  principal  priest- 
hood from  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  ought  to 
provide  and  to  care  for  those  things  which 
please  him,  and  rule  and  govern  the  people 
committed  to  their  care  according  to  his 
will  and  good  pleasure. 

Therefore,  O  most  holy  Head  (Caput),  it 
is  incumbent  upon  us  and  you,  that  irrepre- 
hensibly  we  know  the  things  which  be  his, 
and  that  in  these  we  exercise  ourselves, 
since  from  him  we  have  received  the  im- 
peratorial  dignity,  and  you  the  dignity  of 
the  chief  priesthood. 

But  now  to  speak  more  to  the  point. 
Your  paternal  blessedness  knows  what  hath 
been  done  in  times  past  in  this  our  roj7al 
city  against  the  venerable  images,  how 
those  who  reigned  immediately  before  us 
destroyed  them  and  subjected  them  to  dis- 
grace and  injury  :  (O  may  it  not  be  imput- 
ed to  them,  for  it  had  been  better  for  them 
had  they  not  laid  their  hands  upon  the 
Church  !)  —  and  how  they  seduced  and 
brought  over  to  their  own  opinion  all  the 
people  who  live  in  these  parts — yea,  even 
the  whole  of  the  East,  in  like  manner,  up 
to  the  time  in  which  God  hath  exalted  us 
to  this  kingdom,  who  seek  his  glory  in 
truth,  and  hold  that  which  has  been  handed 
down  by  his  Apostles  together  with  all 
other  teachers.  Whence  now  with  pure 
heart  and  unfeigned  religion  we  have,  to- 
gether with  all  our  subjects  and  our  most 
learned  divines,  had  constant  conferences 
respecting  the  things  which  relate  to  God, 
and  by  their  advice  have  determined  to 
summon  a  General  Council.  And  Ave  en- 
treat your  paternal  blessedness,  or  rather 
the  Lord  God  entreats,  "  who  will  have  all 
men  to  be  saved  and  to  come  to  the  knowl- 
edge of  the  truth,"  that  you  will  give  your- 
self to  us  and  make  no  delay,  but  come  up 
hither  to  aid  us  in  the  confirmation  and  es- 
tablishment of  the  ancient  tradition  of  ven- 


erable images.  It  is,  indeed,  incumbent  on 
your  holiness  to  do  this,  since  you  know 
how  it  is  written — "Comfort  ye,  comfort 
ye,  my  people,  ye  priests,  saith  the  Lord," 
and  "  the  lips  of  the  priest  shall  keep 
knowledge,  and  the  law  shall  go  forth  out 
of  his  mouth,  for  he  is  the  angel  of  the 
Lord  of  Hosts."  And  again,  the  divine 
Apostle,  the  preacher  of  the  truth,  who, 
"  from  Jerusalem  and  round  about  unto  II- 
lyricum,  preached  the  Gospel,"  hath  thus 
commanded  —  "Feed  with  discipline  the 
flock  of  Christ  which  he  purchased  with  his 
own  blood."  As  then  you  are  the  verita- 
ble chief  priest  (primus  sacerdos)  who  pre- 
sides in  the  place  and  in  the  see  of  the 
holy  and  superlaudable  Apostle  Peter,  let 
your  paternal  blessedness  come  to  us,  as  we 
have  said  before,  and  add  your  presence  to 
all  those  other  priests  avIio  shall  be  assem- 
bled together  here,  that  thus  the  will  of  the 
Lord  may  be  accomplished.  For  as  we  are 
taught  in  the  Gospels  our  Lord  saith — 
"When  two  or  three  are  met  together  in 
my  name,  there  am  I  in  the  midst  of  them  " 
— let  your  paternal  and  sacred  blessedness 
be  certified  and  confirmed  by  the  great  God 
and  King  of  all,  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and 
by  us  his  servants,  that  if  you  come  up 
hither  you  shall  be  received  with  all  honour 
and  glory,  and  that  everything  necessary 
for  you  shall  be  granted.  And  again,  when 
the  definition  {capihdum)  shall  be  com- 
pleted, which  by  the  good  pleasure  of  Christ 
our  God  we  hope  shall  be  done,  we  take 
upon  us  to  provide  for  you  every  facility  of 
returning  with  honour  and  distinction.  If, 
however,  your  blessedness  cannot  attend 
upon  us  (which  we  can  scarcely  imagine, 
knowing  what  is  your  zeal  about  divine 
things),  at  least,  pray  select  for  us  men  of 
understanding,  having  with  them  letters 
from  your  holiness,  that  they  may  be  pres- 
ent here  in  the  person  of  your  sacred  and 
paternal  blessedness.     So,  when  they  meet 


1  "Bivine"  here,  as  usually  in  such  connections,  means  "im- 
perial." 

2  Mendham  ( The  Seventh  General  Council,  the  Second  of  Ni- 
ccea.    London,  s.d.)  by  a  curious  blunder  takes  the  adjective  for 


the  substantive,  and  translatss  "  The  Sacred  Divalis."  This  is  a 
mere  trip,  for  he  knows  the  word  "  sacra,"  as  appears  a  few  pages 
further  on. 


VOL.    XIV. 


m  m 


530 


II.  NICE.     A.D.   787 


with  the  other  priests  who  are  here,  the 
ancient  tradition  of  our  holy  fathers  may 
be  synodically  confirmed,  and  every  evil 
plant  of  tares  may  be  rooted  out,  and  the 
words  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ 
may  be  fulfilled,  that  "  the  gates  of  hell 
shall  not  prevail  against  her."  And  after 
this,  may  there  be  no  further  schism  and 
separation  in  the  one  holy  Catholic  and 
Apostolic  Church,  of  which  Christ  our  true 
God  is  the  Head. 

We  have  had  Con  stan tine,  beloved  in 
Christ,  most  holy  Bishop  of  Leontina  in  our 
beloved  Sicily,  with  whom  your  paternal 
blessedness  is  well  acquainted,  into  our 
presence ;  and,  having  spoken  with  him 
face  to  face,  have  sent  him  with  this  our 
present  venerable  jussio  to  you.     Whom, 


after  that  he  hath  seen  you,  forthwith  dis- 
miss, that  he  may  come  back  to  us,  and 
write  us  by  him  concerning  your  coming — 
what  time  we  may  expect  will  be  spent  in 
your  journeying  thence  and  coming  to  us. 
Moreover,  he  can  retain  with  him  the  most 
holy  Bishop  of  Naples,  and  come  up  hither 
together  with  him.  And,  as  your  journey 
will  be  by  way  of  Naples  and  Sicily  we 
have  given  orders  to  the  Governor  of  Sicily 
about  this,  that  he  take  due  care  to  have 
every  needful  preparation  made  for  your 
honour  and  rest,  which  is  necessary  in  or- 
der that  }rour  paternal  blessedness  may 
come  to  us.  Given  on  the  ivth  before  the 
calends  of  September,  the  seventh  indic- 
tion,  from  the  Koyal  City. 


THE  IMPEEIAL  SACRA. 


EEAD  AT  THE  FIRST  SESSION. 


{Found  in  Lahbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom,  VII.,  col.  £9.) 


Constantine  and  Irene — Sovereigns  of 
the  Romans  in  the  Faith,  to  the  most  holy 
Bishops,  who,  by  the  grace  of  God  and  by 
the  command  of  our  pious  Sovereignty, 
have  met  together  in  the  Council  of  Nice. 

The  Wisdom  which  is  truly  according  to 
the  nature  of  God  and  the  Father — our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  our  true  God — who,  by 
his  most  divine  and  wonderful  dispen- 
sation in  the  flesh,  hath  delivered  us  from 
all  idolatrous  error :  and,  by  taking  on  him 
our'nature,  hath  renewed  the  same  by  the 
co-operation  of  the  Spirit,  which  is  of  the 
same  nature  with  himself  ;  and  having  him- 
self become  the  first  High  Priest,  hath  ac- 
counted you  holy  men,  Avorthy  of  the  same 
dignity. 

He  is  that  good  Shepherd  who,  bearing 
on  his  own  shoulders  that  wandering  sheep 
— fallen  man,  hath  brought  him  back  to 
his  own  peculiar  fold — that  is,  the  com- 
pany of  angelic  and  ministering  powers 
(Eph.  ii.  14,  15),  and  hath  reconciled  us 
in  himself  and  having  taken  away  the  wall 
of  partition,  hath  broken  down  the  enmity 
through  his  flesh,  and  hath  bestowed  upon 
us  a  rule  of  conduct  tending  to  peace ; 
wherefore,  preaching  to  all,  he  saith  in  the 
Gospel,  Blessed  are  the  peacemakers,  for 
they  shall  be  called  the  children  of  God 


(Matt.  v.  9).  Of  which  blessedness,  con- 
firming as  it  does  the  exaltation  of  the 
adoption  of  sons,  our  pious  Sovereignty 
desiring  above  all  things  to  be  made 
partakers,  hath  ever  applied  the  utmost 
diligence  to  direct  all  our  Roinan  Com- 
monwealth into  the  ways  of  unity  and 
concord ;  and  more  especially  have  we 
been  solicitous  concerning  the  right  regula- 
tion of  the  Church  of  God,  and  most 
anxious  in  every  way  to  promote  the  unity 
of  the  priesthood.  For  which  cause  the 
Chiefs  of  the  Sacerdotal  Order  of  the  East 
and  of  the  North,  of  the  West  and  of  the 
South,  are  present  in  the  person  of  their 
Representative  Bishops,  who  have  with 
them  respectively  the  replies  written  in 
answers  to  the  Synodical  Epistle  sent  from 
the  most  holy  Patriarch ;  for  such  was 
from  the  beginning  the  synodical  regulation 
of  the  Church  Catholic,  which,  from  the  one 
end  of  the  earth  to  the  other,  hath  received 
the  Gospel.  On  this  account  we  have,  by 
the  good  will  and  permission  of  God,  caused 
you,  his  most  holy  Priests,  to  meet  together 
— you  who  are  accustomed  to  dispense  his 
Testimony  in  the  unbloody  sacrifice — that 
your  decision  may  be  in  accordance  with 
the  definitions  of  former  councils  who  de- 
creed rightly,  and  that  the  splendour  of  the 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


531 


Spirit  may  illumine  you  in  all  things,  for,  as 
our  Lord  teaches,  No  man  lighteth  a  can- 
dle and  putteth  it  under  a  bushel,  but  on  a 
candlestick,  that  it  may  give  light  to  all 
that  are  in  the  house;  even  so,  should  ye 
make  such  use  of  the  various  regulations 
which  have  been  piously  handed  down  to 
us  of  old  by  our  Fathers,  that  all  the  Holy 
Churches  of  God  may  remain  in  peaceful 
order. 

As  for  us,  such  was  our  zeal  for  the  truth 
— such  our  earnest  desire  for  the  interests 
of  religion,  our  care  for  ecclesiastical  order, 
our  anxiety  that  the  ancient  rules  and  or- 
ders should  maintain  their  ground — that 
though  fully  engaged  in  military  coun- 
cils— though  all  our  attention  was  occupied 
in  political  cares — yet,  treating  all  these  af- 
fairs as  but  of  minor  importance,  we  would 
allow  nothing  whatever  to  interfere  with 
the  convocation  of  your  most  holy  council. 
To  every  one  is  given  the  utmost  freedom 
of  expressing  his  sentiments  without  the 
least  hesitation,  that  thus  the  subject  under 
enquiry  may  be  most  fully  discussed  and 
truth  may  be  the  more  boldly  spoken,  that 
so  all  dissensions  may  be  banished  from 
the  Church  and  we  all  may  be  united  in  the 
bonds  of  peace. 

For,  when  the  most  holy  Patriarch  Paul, 
by  the  divine  will,  was  about  to  be  liberated 
from  the  bands  of  mortality  and  to  ex- 
change his  earthly  pilgrimage  for  a  heav- 
enly home  with  his  Master  Christ,  he  abdi- 
cated the  Patriarchate  and  took  upon  him 
the  monastic  life,  and  when  we  asked  him, 
Why  hast  thou  done  this  ?  he  answered, 
Because  I  fear  that,  if  death  should  surprise 
me  still  in  the  episcopate  of  this  royal  and 
heaven-defended  city,  I  should  have  to 
carry  with  me  the  anathema  of  the  whole 
Catholic  Church,  which  consigns  me  to  that 
outer  darkness  which  is  prepared  for  the 
devil  and  his  angels ;  for  they  say  that  a 
certain  synod  hath  been  held  here  in  order 
to  the  subversion  of  pictures  and  images 
which  the  Catholic  Church  holds,  embraces, 
and  receives,  in  memory  of  the  persons  whom 
they  represent.  This  is  that  which  distracts 
my  soul — this  is  that  which  makes  me 
anxiously  to  enquire  how  I  may  escape  the 
judgment  of  God — since  among  such  men 
I  have  been  brought  up  and  with  such  am 
I  numbered.  No  sooner  had  he  thus  spoken 
in  the  presence  of  some  of  our  most  illustri- 
ous nobles  than  he  expired. 


When  our  Pious  Sovereignty  reflected  on 
this  awful  declaration  (and  truly,  even  be- 
fore this  event,  we  had  heard  of  similar 
questionings  from  many  around),  we  took 
counsel  with  ourselves  as  to  what  ought  to 
be  done ;  and  we  determined,  after  mature 
deliberation,  that  when  a  new  Patriarch 
had  been  elected,  we  should  endeavour 
to  bring  this  subject  to  some  decisive 
conclusion.  Wherefore,  having  summoned 
those  whom  we  knew  to  be  most  experi- 
enced in  ecclesiastical  matters,  and  having 
called  upon  Christ  our  God,  we  consulted 
with  them  who  was  worthy  to  be  exalted  to 
the  chair  of  the  Priesthood  of  this  Royal 
and  God-preserved  city ;  and  they  all  with 
one  heart  and  soul  gave  their  vote  in  favour 
of  Tarasius — he  who  now  occupies  the  Pon- 
tifical Presidency.  Having,  therefore,  sent 
for  him,  Ave  laid  before  him  our  delibera- 
tions and  our  vote ;  but  he  would  by  no 
means  consent,  nor  at  all  yield  to  that 
which  had  been  determined.  And  when 
we  enquired,  Wherefore  he  thus  refused  his 
consent? — at  first  he  answered  evasively, 
That  the  yoke  of  the  Chief  Priesthood 
was  too  much  for  him.  But  we,  know- 
ing this  to  be  a  mere  pretext  covering 
his  unwillingness  to  obey  us,  would  not  de- 
sist from  our  importunity,  but  persisted  in 
pressing  the  acceptance  of  the  dignity  of  the 
Chief  Priesthood  upon  him.  When  he 
found  how  urgent  we  were  with  him,  he 
told  us  the  cause  of  his  refusal.  It  is  (said 
he)  because  I  perceive  that  the  Church 
which  has  been  founded  on  the  rock,  Christ 
our  God,  is  rent  and  torn  asunder  by 
schisms,  and  that  we  are  unstable  in  our 
confession,  and  that  Christians  in  the  East, 
of  the  same  faith  with  ourselves,  decline 
communion  with  us,  and  unite  themselves 
with  those  of  the  West ;  and  so  we  are  es- 
tranged from  all,  and  each  day  are  anathe- 
matized by  all :  and,  moreover,  I  should 
demand  that  an  Ecumenical  Council  should 
be  held,  at  which  should  be  found  Legates 
from  the  Pope  of  Rome  and  from  the  Chief 
Priests  of  the  East.  We,  therefore,  fully 
understanding  these  things,  introduced  him 
to  the  assembled  company  of  the  Priests — 
of  our  most  illustrious  Princes — and  of  all 
our  Christian  people ;  and  then,  in  their 
presence,  he  repeated  to  them  all  that  he 
had  before  said  to  us;  which,  when  they 
heard,  they  received  him  joyfully,  and. 
earnestly  entreated  our  peace-making  and 


m  m  2 


532 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


pious  Sovereignty  that  an  Ecumenical 
Council  might  be  assembled.  To  this  their 
request,  we  gave  our  hearty  consent ;  for, 
to  speak  the  truth,  it  is  by  the  good  will 
and  under  the  direction  of  our  God  that 
we  have  assembled  you  together.  Where- 
fore as  God,  willing  to  establish  his  own 
counsel,  hath  for  this  purpose  brought  you 
together  from  all  parts  of  the  world,  behold 
the  Gospels  now  lying  before  yon,  and 
plainly  crying  aloud,  "  Judge  justly ; "  stand 
firm  as  champions  of  religion,  and  be  ready 
with  unsparing  hand  to  cut  away  all  inno- 
vations and  new  fangled  inventions.  And, 
as  Peter  the  Chief  of  the  Apostolic  Col- 
lege, struck  the  mad  slave  and  cut  off  his 
Jewish  ear  with  the  sword,  so  in  like  man- 
ner do  ye  wield  the  axe  of  the  Spirit,  and 
every  tree  which  bears  the  fruit  of  conten- 
tion, of  strife,  or  newly  -imported  innova- 
tion, either  renew  by  transplanting  through 
the  words  of  sound  doctrine,  or  lay  it  low 
with  canonical  censure,  and  send  it  to  the 
fires  of  the  future  Gehenna,  so  that  the 


peace  of  the  Spirit  may  evermore  protect 
the  whole  body  of  the  Church,  compacted 
and  united  in  one,  and  confirmed  by  the 
traditions  of  the  Fathers ;  and  so  may 
all  our  Roman  State  enjoy  peace  as  well  as 
the  Church. 

We  have  received  letters  from  Hadrian, 
most  Holy  Pope  of  old  Rome,  by  his  Le- 
gates—  namely,  Peter,  the  God-beloved 
Archpresbyter,  and  Peter,  the  God  -be- 
loved Presbyter  and  Abbot — who  will  be 
present  in  council  with  you ;  and  we  com- 
mand that,  according  to  synodical  custom, 
these  be  read  in  the  hearing  of  you  all ;  and 
that,  having  heard  these  with  becoming  si- 
lence, and  moreover  the  Epistles  contained 
in  two  octavos  sent  by  the  Chief  Priest  and 
other  Priests  of  the  Eastern  dioceses  by 
John,  most  pious  Monk  and  Chancellor 
of  the  Patriarchal  throne  of  Antioch,  and 
Thomas,  Priest  and  Abbot,  who  also  are 
present  together  with  you,  ye  may  by  these 
understand  what  are  the  sentiments  of  the 
Church  Catholic  on  this  point. 


EXTRACTS  FROM  THE  ACTS. 

SESSION  I. 


(Labbe  and  Cossart 

[Certain  bishops  who  had  been  led  astray 
by  the  Iconoclasts  came,  ashing  to  be  received 
bach.  The  first  of  these  was  Basil  of  An- 
eyra.] 


The  bishop  Basil  of  Aneyra  read  as  fol- 
lows from  a  book ;  Inasmuch  as  ecclesi- 
astical legislation  has  canonically  been 
handed  down  from  past  time,  even  from  the 
beginning  from  the  holy  Apostles,  and  from 
their  successors,  who  were  our  holy  fathers 
and  teachers,  and  also  from  the  six  holy 
and  ecumenical  synods,  and  from  the  local 
synods  which  were  gathered  in  the  interests 
of  orthodoxy,  that  those  returning  from  any 
heresy  whatever  to  the  orthodox  faith  and 
to  the  tradition  of  the  Catholic  Church, 
might  deny  their  own  heresy,  and  confess 
the  orthodox  faith, 

Wherefore  I,  Basil,  bishop  of  the  city  of 
Aneyra,  proposing  to  be  united  to  the  Catho- 
lic Church,  and  to  Hadrian  the  most  holy 
Pope  of  Old  Rome,  and  to  Tarasius  the  most 
blessed  Patriarch,  and  to  the  most  holy 
apostolic  sees,  to  wit,  Alexandria,  Antioch, 
and  the  Holy  City,  as  well  as  to  all  orthodox 
high-priests  and  priests,  make  this  written 
confession  of  my  faith,  and  I  offer  it  to  you 
as  to  those  who  have  received  power  by 
apostolic  authority.  And  in  this  also  I  beg 
pardon  from  your  divinely  gathered  holiness 
for  my  tardiness  in  this  matter.  For  it  was 
not  right  that  I  should  have  fallen  behind 
in  the  confession  of  orthodoxy,  but  it  arose 
from  my  entire  lack  of  knowledge,  and  sloth- 
ful and  negligent  mind  in  the  matter. 
Wherefore  the  rather  I  ask  your  blessed- 
ness to  grant  me  indulgence  in  God's  sight. 

I  believe,  therefore,  and  make  my  con- 
fession in  one  Cod,  the  Father  Almighty,  and 
in  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  his  only  begotten 
Son,  and  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  Lord  and 
Giver  of  Life.  The  Trinity,  one  in  essence 
and  one  in  majesty,  must  be  worshipped 
and  glorified  in  one  godhead,  power,  and 
authority.  I  confess  all  things  pertaining 
to  the  incarnation  of  one  of  the  Holy  Trinity, 
our  Lord  and  God,  Jesus  Christ,  as  the 
Saints  and  the  six  Ecumenical  Synods  have 


Concilia,  Tom.  VIL,  col.  53.) 

handed  down.  And  I  reject  and  anathema- 
tize every  heretical  babbling,  as  they  also 
have  rejected  them.  I  ask  for  the  interces- 
sions (Trpeafielas)  of  our  spotless  Lady  the 
Holy  Mother  of  God,  and  those  of  the  holy 
and  heavenly  powers,  and  those  of  all  the 
Saints.1 

And  receiving  their  holy  and  honourable 
reliques  with  all  honour  (rifxrj<;),  I  salute  and 
venerate  these  with  honour  (Ttyw/Tt«a>9  irpoa- 
Kvveco),  hoping  to  have  a  share  in  their  holi- 
ness. Likewise  also  the  venerable  images 
(eitc6va<;)  of  the  incarnation  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  in  the  humanity  he  assumed  for  our 
salvation ;  and  of  our  spotless  Lady,  the  holy 
Mother  of  God ;  and  of  the  angels  like  unto 
God ;  and  of  the  holy  Apostles,  Prophets, 
Martyrs,  and  of  all  the  Saints — the  sacred 
images  of  all  these,  I  salute  and  venerate — 
rejecting  and  anathematizing  with  my  whole 
soul  and  mind  the  synod  which  was  gath- 
ered together  out  of  stubbornness  and  mad- 
ness, and  which  styled  itself  the  Seventh 
Synod,  but  which  by  those  who  think  ac- 
curately was  called  lawfully  and  canonically 
a  pseudo-synod,  as  being  contrary  to  all 
truth  and  piety,  and  audaciously  and  teme- 
rariously  against  the  divinely  handed  down 
ecclesiastical  legislation,  yea,  even  impious- 
ly having  yelped  at  and  scoffed  at  the  holy 
and  venerable  images,  and  having  ordered 
these  to  be  taken  away  out  of  the  holy 
churches  of  God  ;  over  which  assembly  pre- 
sided Theodosius  with  the  pseudonym  of 
Ephesius,  Sisinnius  of  Perga,  with  the  sur- 
name Pastillas,  Basilius  of  Pisidia,  falsely 


1  Thus  far  there  was  no  expression  of  opinion  from  which  the 
Iconoclasts  would  have  dissented,  for  in  all  that  regarded  the 
Blessed  Virgin  and  the  Saints  and  their  invocation  and  patronage, 
the  heretics  agreed  with  the  orthodox.  Protestants  have  been  in 
the  habit  of  treating  the  Iconoclasts  as  if  they  were  substantially 
agreed  with  them  with  regard  to  the  cultus  of  the  Blessed  Virgin 
and  of  the  other  Saints.  What  an  error  this  is,  is  easily  proved  by 
citing  two  of  the  anathematisms  of  their  Conciliabulum. 

"If  aiiyone  shall  not  confess  that  the  Ever-virgin  Mary  is  prop- 
erly and  truly  the  Mother  of  God,  and  more  exalted  than  every 
creature,  whether  visible  or  invisible,  and  does  not  seek  her  inter- 
cessions with  sincere  faith,  because  she  has  confidence  in  ap- 
proaching our  God.  who  was  born  of  her,  let  him  be  anathema." 
(L.  and  G,  Cone.,  Tom.  VII.,  col.  524.) 

"  If  anyone  does  not  confess  that  all  the  Saints  from  the  begin- 
ning down  to  now,  who  whether  before  the  Law,  or  under  the 
Law,  or  in  grace  pleased  God,  should  be  honoured  in  his  presence 
both  with  soul  and  body ;  and  does  not  seek  their  prayers,  accord- 
ing to  the  tradition  of  the  Church  as  of  those  having  confidence 
to  plead  for  the  world,  let  him  be  anathema."    (Ibid.  col.  59,8.) 


534 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


called  "  tricaccabus ;  "  with  whom  the 
"wretched  Constantine,  the  then  Patriarch, 
was  led  (efiaraico'iirj)  astray. 

These  things  thus  I  confess  and  to  these 
I  assent,  and  therefore  in  simplicity  of  heart 
and  in  uprightness  of  mind,  in  the  presence 
of  God,  I  have  made  the  subjoined  anatk- 
ematisms. 

Anathema  to  the  calumniators  of  the 
Christians,  that  is  to  the  image  breakers. 

Anathema  to  those  who  apply  the  words 
of  Holy  Scripture  which  were  spoken 
against  idols,  to  the  venerable  images. 

Anathema  to  those  who  do  not  salute  the 
holy  and  venerable  images. 

Anathema  to  those  who  say  that  Chris- 
tians have  recourse  to  the  images  as  to  gods. 

Anathema  to  those  who  call  the  sacred 
images  idols. 

Anathema  to  those  who  knowingly  com- 
municate with  those  who  revile  and  dishon- 
our the  venerable  images. 

Anathema  to  those  who  say  that  another 
than  Christ  our  Lord  hath  delivered  us 
from  idols. 

Anathema  to  those  who  spurn  the  teach- 
ings of  the  holy  Fathers  and  the  tradition 
of  the  Catholic  Church,  taking  as  a  pretext 
and  making  their  own  the  arguments  of 
Alius,  Nestorius,  Eutyches,  and  Dioscorus, 
that  unless  we  were  evidently  taught  by 
the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  we  should 
not  follow  the  teachings  of  the  holy  Fa- 
thers and  of  the  holy  Ecumenical  Synods, 
and  tho  tradition  of  the  Catholic  Church. 

Anathema  to  those  Avho  dare  to  say  that 
the  Catholic  Church  hath  at  any  time  sanc- 
tioned idols. 

Anathema  to  those  who  say  that  the  mak- 
ing of  images  is  a  diabolical  invention  and 
not  a  tradition  of  our  holy  Fathers. 

This  is  my  confession  [of  faith]  and  to 
these  propositions  I  give  my  assent.  And 
I  pronounce  this  with  my  whole  heart,  and 
soul,  and  mind. 


And  if  at  any  time  by  the  fraud  of  the 
devil  (which  may  God  forbid !)  I  volunta- 
rily or  involuntarily  shall  be  opposed  to 
what  I  have  now  professed,  may  I  be  anath- 
ema from  the  Father,  the  Son  and  the 
Holy  Ghost,  and  from  the  Catholic  Church 
and  every  hierarchical  order  a  stranger. 

I  will  keep  myself  from  every  acceptance 
of  a  bribe  and  from  filthy  lucre  in  accord- 
ance with  the  divine  canons  of  the  holy 
Apostles  and  of  the  approved  Fathers. 

Tarasius,  the  most  holy  Patriarch,  said : 
This  whole  sacred  gathering  yields  glory 
and  thanks  to  God  for  this  confession  of 
yours,  which  you  have  made  to  the  Catho- 
lic Church. 

The  Holy  Synod  said  :  Glory  to  God 
which  maketh  one  that  which  was  severed. 

[Theodore,  hishop  of  Myra,  then  read  the 
same  confession,  and,  was  received.  The 
next  bislwj)  who  asked  to  be  received  read  as 
follows :  {col.  60)] 

Theodosius,  the  humble  Christian,  to  the 
holy  and  Ecumenical  Synod  :  I  confess  and 
I  agree  to  (avvTiSefiai)  and  I  receive  and  I 
salute  and  I  Arenerate  in  the  first  place  the 
spotless  image  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
our  true  God,  and  the  holy  image  of  her 
who  bore  him  without  seed,  the  holy  Moth- 
er of  God,  and  her  help  and  protection  and 
intercessions  each  day  and  night  as  a  sin- 
ner to  my  aid  I  call  for,  since  she  has  con- 
fidence with  Christ  our  God,  as  he  was 
born  of  her.  Likewise  also  I  receive  and 
venerate  the  images  of  the  holy  and  most 
laudable  Apostles,  prophets,  and  martyrs 
and  the  fathers  and  cultivators  of  the  des- 
ert. Not  indeed  as  gods  (God  forbid !)  do 
I  ask  all  these  with  my  whole  heart  to  pray 
for  me  to  God,  that  he  may  grant  me  through 
their  intercessions  to  find  mercy  at  his 
hands  at  the  day  of  judgment,  for  in  this 
I  am  but  showing  forth  more  clearly  the 
affection  and  love  of  my  soul  which  I  have 
borne  them  from  the  first.  Likewise  also  I 
venerate  and  honour  and  salute  the  reliques 
of  the  Saints  as  of  those  who  fought  for 
Christ  and  who  have  received  grace  from 
him  for  the  healing  of  diseases  and  the  cur- 
ing of  sicknesses  and  the  casting  out  of 
devils,  as  the  Christian  Church  has  received 
from  the  holy  Apostles  and  Fathers  even 
down  to  us  to-day. 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


535 


Moreover,  I  am  well  pleased  that  there 
should  be  images  in  the  churches  of  the 
faithful,  especially  the  image  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  and  of  the  holy  Mother  of 
God,  of  every  kind  of  material,  both  gold 
and  silver  and  of  every  colour,  so  that  his 
incarnation  may  be  set  forth  to  all  men. 
Likewise  there  may  be  painted  the  lives  of 
the  Saints  and  Prophets  and  Martyrs,  so 
that  their  struggles  and  agonies  may  be  set 
forth  in  brief,  for  the  stirring  up  and  teach- 
ing of  the  people,  especially  of  the  un- 
learned. 

For  if  the  people  go  forth  with  lights  and 
incense  to  meet  the  "  laurata  "  and  images 
of  the  Emperors  when  they  are  sent  to  cities 
or  rural  districts,  they  honour  surely  not 
the  tablet  covered  over  with  wax,  but  the 
Emperor  himself.  How  much  more  is  it 
necessary  that  in  the  churches  of  Christ 
our  God,  the  image  of  God  our  Saviour  and 
of  his  spotless  Mother  and  of  all  the  holy 
and  blessed  fathers  and  ascetics  should  be 
painted  ?  Even  as  also  St.  Basil  says : 
"  Writers  and  painters  set  forth  the  great 
deeds  of  war ;  the  one  by  word,  the  other 
by  their  pencils ;  and  each  stirs  many  to 
courage."  And  again  the  same  author, 
"  How  much  pains  have  you  ever  taken 
that  you  might  find  one  of  the  Saints  who 
was  willing  to  be  your  importunate  inter- 
cessor to  the  Lord?"1  And  Chrysostom 
saj^s,  "  The  charity  of  the  Saints  is  not  di- 
minished by  their  death,  nor  does  it  come  to 
an  end  with  their  exit  from  life,  but  after 
their  death  they  are  still  more  powerful 
than  when  they  were  alive,"  and  many  other 
things  without  measure.  Therefore  I  ask 
you,  O  ye  Saints !  I  call  out  to  you.  I  have 
sinned  against  heaven  and  in  your  sight. 
Receive  me  as  God  received  the  luxurious 
man,  and  the  harlot,  and  the  thief.     Seek 

1  Mendham  seems  to  have  reversed  the  sense  here  altogether. 


me  out,  as  Christ  sought  out  the  sheep 
that  was  lost,  which  he  carried  on  his 
shoulders  ;  so  that  there  may  be  joy  in  the 
presence  of  God  and  of  his  angels  over  my 
salvation  and  repentance,  through  your  in- 
tervention, O  all-holy  lords !  Let  them 
who  do  not  venerate  the  holy  and  venerable 
images  be  anathema !  Anathema  to  those 
who  blaspheme  against  the  honourable  and 
venerable  images !  To  those  who  dare  to 
attack  and  blaspheme  the  venerable  images 
and  call  them  idols,  anathema !  To  the 
calumniators  of  Christianity,  that  is  to  say 
the  Iconoclasts,  anathema !  To  those  who 
do  not  diligently  teach  all  the  Christ-loving 
people  to  venerate  and  salute  the  venerable 
and  sacred  and  honourable  images  of  all  the 
Saints  who  pleased  God  in  their  several 
generations,  anathema !  To  those  who  have 
a  doubtful  mind  and  do  not  confess  with 
their  whole  hearts  that  they  venerate  the 
sacred  images,  anathema ! 

Sabbas,  the  most  reverend  hegumenus  of 
the  monastery  of  the  Studium,  said:  Ac- 
cording to  the  Apostolic  precepts  and  the 
Ecumenical  Synods  he  is  worthy  to  be  re- 
ceived back. 

Tarasius,  the  most  holy  Patriarch,  said : 
Those  who  formerly  were  the  calumniators 
of  orthodoxy,  now  are  become  the  advocates 
of  the  truth. 

[Near  the  end  of  this  session,  (col.  77)] 

John,  the  most  reverend  bishop  and  leg- 
ate of  the  Eastern  high  priests  said :  This 
heresy  is  the  worst  of  all  heresies.  Woe 
to  the  iconoclasts !  It  is  the  worst  of  her- 
esies, as  it  subverts  the  incarnation 
{olKovojxiav)  of  our  Saviour.2 

5  In  the  English  Hefele  (Vol.  V.,  p.  363)  this  appears  in  the  fol- 
lowing most  extraordinary  form.  "  John  .  .  .  declared  that  the 
veneration  of  images  was  the  worst  of  all  heresies  '  because  it  de- 
tracted from  the  Economy  (Incarnation)  of  the  Redeemer.' "  (!) 


EXTRACTS  FROM  THE  ACTS. 


SESSION  II. 

[  The  Papal  Letters  were  presented  by  the  Legates.  First  ivas  read  that  to  Constan- 
tine and  Irene,  but  not  in  its  entirety,  if  we  may  trust  Anastasius  the  Librarian,  who 
gives  what  he  says  is  the  original  Latin  text.  Here  follows  a  translation  of  this  and  of 
the  Greek,  also  a  translation  of  the  Latin  passage  altogether  omitted,  (as  we  are  told) 
with  the  consent  of  the  Roman  Legates^] 

PART  OF  POPE  HADRIAN'S  LETTER. 


[As  written  by  the  Pope.] 


[As  read  in  Greek  to  the  Council.'] 


(Migne,  Pat.  Lot.,  Tom.  XCVL,  col.  1217.) '  (Migne,  Pat.  Lot.,  Tom.  XCVI,  col.  1218.) 


If  you  persevere  in  that  orthodox  Faith  in 
which  you  have  begun,  and  the  sacred  and 
venerable  images  be  by  your  means  erected 
again  in  those  parts,  as  by  the  lord,  the 
Emperor  Constantine  of  pious  memoiy,  and 
the  blessed  Helen,  who  promulgated  the 
orthodox  Faith,  and  exalted  the  holy  Cath- 
olic and  Apostolic  Roman  Church  your 
spiritual  mother,  and  with  the  other  ortho- 
dox Emperors  venerated  it  as  the  head  of 
all  Churches,  so  will  your  Clemency,  that  is 
protected  of  God,  receive  the  name  of  an- 
other Constantino,  and  another  Helen, 
through  whom  at  the  beginning  the  holy 
Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church  derived 
strength,  and  like  whom  your  own  imperial 
fame  is  spread  abroad  by  triumphs,  so  as 
to  be  brilliant  and  deeply  fixed  in  the  whole 
world.  But  the  more,  if  following  the  tra- 
ditions of  the  orthodox  Faith,  you  embrace 
the  judgment  of  the  Church  of  blessed  Peter, 
chief  of  the  Apostles,  and,  as  of  old  your 
predecessors  the  holy  Emperors  acted,  so 
you,  too,  venerating  it  with  honour,  love  with 
all  your  heart  his  Vicar,  and  if  your  sacred 
majesty  follow  by  preference  their  ortho- 
dox Faith,  according  to  our  holy  Eoman 
Church.  May  the  chief  of  the  Apostles 
himself,  to  whom  the  power  Avas  given  by 
our  Lord  God  to  bind  and  remit  sins  in 
heaven  and  earth,  be  often  your  protector, 
and  trample  all  barbarous  nations  under 
your  feet,  and  everywhere  make  you  con- 
querors. For  let  sacred  authority  lay  open 
the  marks  of  his  dignity,  and  how  great 
veneration  ought  to  be  shewn  to  his,  the 
highest  See,  by  all  the  faithful  in  the  world. 
For  the  Lord  set  him  who  bears  the  keys 


If  the  ancient  orthodoxy  be  perfected 
and  restored  by  your  means  in  those  re- 
gions, and  the  venerable  icons  be  placed 
in  their  original  state,  you  will  be  partakers 
with  the  Lord  Constantine,  Emperor  of  old, 
now  in  the  Divine  keeping,  and  the  Em- 
press Helena,  who  made  conspicuous  and 
confirmed  the  orthodox  Faith,  and  exalted 
still  more  your  holy  mother,  the  Catholic 
and  Roman  and  spiritual  Church,  and  with 
the  orthodox  Emperors  who  ruled  after 
them,  and  so  your  most  pious  and  heaven- 
protected  name  likewise  will  be  set  forth 
as  that  of  another  Constantine  and  another 
Helena,  being  renowned  and  praised 
through  the  whole  world,  by  whom  the 
holy  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church  is  re- 
stored. Aud  especially  if  you  follow  the 
tradition  of  the  orthodox  Faith  of  the 
Church  of  the  holy  Peter  and  Paul,  the 
chief  Apostles,  and  embrace  their  Vicar,  as 
the  Emperors  who  reigned  before  you  of 
old  both  honoured  their  Vicar,  and  loved 
him  with  all  their  heart :  and  if  your 
sacred  majesty  honour  the  most  holy 
Roman  Church  of  the  chief  Apostles,  to 
whom  was  given  power  by  God  the  Word 
himself  to  loose  and  to  bind  sins  in 
heaven  and  earth.  For  they  will  extend 
their  shield  over  your  power,  and  all  bar- 
barous nations  shall  be  put  under  your 
feet :  and  wherever  you  go  they  will  make 
you  conquerors.  For  the  holy  and  chief 
Apostles  themselves,  who  set  up  the  Catho- 
;  lie  and  orthodox  Faith,  have  laid  it  down 
j  as  a  written  law  that  all  who  after  them  are 
i  to  be  successors  of  their  seats,  should  hold 
their  Faith  and  remain  in  it  to  the  end. 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


537 


of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  as  chief  over  all, 
and  by  Him  is  he  honoured  with  this  privi- 
lege, by  which  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  are  entrusted  to  him.  He,  there- 
fore, that  was  preferred  with  so  exalted  an 
honour  was  thought  worthy  to  confess  that 
Faith  on  which  the  Church  of  Christ  is 
founded.  A  blessed  reward  followed  that 
blessed  confession,  by  the  preaching  of 
which  the  holy  universal  Church  was  illu- 
mined, and  from  it  the  other  Churches  of 
God  have  derived  the  proofs  of  Faith.  For 
the  blessed  Peter  himself,  the  chief  of  the 
Apostles,  who  first  sat  in  the  Apostolic  See, 
left  the  chiefship  of  his  Apostolate,  and 
pastoral  care,  to  his  successors,  who  are  to 
sit  in  his  most  holy  seat  for  ever.  And 
that  power  of  authority,  which  he  received 
from  the  Lord  God  our  Saviour,  he  too  be- 
stowed and  delivered  by  divine  command 
to  the  Pontiffs,  his  successors,  etc, 


[The part  which  was  never  read  to  the  Council  at  all.] 
(Found  in  L.  and  C,  Concilia,  Tom.  VII.,  col.  117.) 


We  greatly  wondered  that  in  your  impe- 
rial commands,  directed  for  the  Patriarch 
of  the  royal  city,  Tarasius,  we  find  him 
there  called  Universal :  but  we  know  not 
whether  this  was  written  through  ignorance 
or  schism,  or  the  heresy  of  the  wicked. 
But  henceforth  we  advise  your  most  mer- 
ciful and  imperial  majesty,  that  he  be  by 
no  means  called  Universal  in  your  writings, 
because  it  appears  to  be  contrary  to  the  in- 
stitutions of  the  holy  Canons  and  the  de- 
crees of  the  traditions  of  the  holy  Fathers. 
For  he  never  could  have  ranked  second, 
save  for  the  authority  of  our  holy  Catholic 
and  Apostolic  Church,  as  is  plain  to  all.1 
Because  if  he  be  named  Universal,  above 
the  holy  Roman  Church  which  has  a  prior 
rank,  which  is  the  head  of  all  the  Churches 
of  God,  it  is  certain  that  he  shews  himself 
as  a  rebel  against  the  holy  Councils,  and 
a  heretic.  For,  if  he  is  Universal,  he  is 
recognized  to  have  the  Primacy  even  over 
the  Church  of  our  See,  which  appears  ri- 
diculous to  all  faithful  Christians  :  because 
in  the  whole  world  the  chief  rank  and 
power  was   given   to  the   blessed  Apostle 

'  This  statement  seems  somewhat  open  to  criticism  in  view  of 
the  position  taken  by  St.  Leo,  aud  of  the  assertion  of  Pope  Gela- 
6ius  that  Constantinople  w:as  a  suffragan  see  to  Ueraclea. 


Peter  by  the  Redeemer  of  the  world  him- 
self ;  and  through  the  same  Apostle,  whose 
place  we  unworthily  hold,  the  holy  Catholic 
and  Apostolic  Roman  Church  holds  the 
first  rank,  and  the  authority  of  power,  now 
and  for  ever,  so  that  if  any  one,  which  we 
believe  not,  has  called  him,  or  assents  to  his 
being  called  Universal,  let  him  know  that 
he  is  estranged  from  the  orthodox  Faith, 
and  a  rebel  against  our  holy  Catholic  and 
Apostolic  Church. 

[After  the  reading  was  ended  (col.  120)] 

Tarasius  the  most  holy  patriarch  said : 
Did  you  yourselves  receive  these  letters 
from  the  most  holy  Pope,  and  did  you  carry 
them  to  our  pious  Emperor  ? 

Peter  and  Peter  the  most  beloved-of-God 
presbyters  who  held  the  place  of  Hadrian, 
the  most  holy  pope  of  Rome,  said  :  We 
ourselves  received  such  letters  from  our 
apostolic  father  and  delivered  them  to  the 
pious  lords. 

John,  the  most  magnificent  Logothete, 
said :  That  this  is  the  case  is  also  known 
to  the  Sicilians,  the  beloved  of  God  Theo- 
dore, the  bishop  of  Catanea,  and  the  most 
revered  deacon  Epiphanius  who  is  with  him, 


538 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


who  holds  the  place  of  the  archbishop  of 
Sardinia.  For  both  of  these  at  the  bidding 
of  our  pious  Emperors,  weut  to  Kome  with 
the  most  reverend  apocrisarius  of  our  most 
holy  patriarch. 

Theodore  the  God-beloved  bishop  of  Ca- 
tanea,  standing  in  the  midst,  said :  The 
pious  emperor,  by  his  honourable  jussio,  bid 
send  Leo,  the  most  god-beloved  presbyter 
(who  together  with  myself  is  a  slave  of 
your  holiness),  with  the  precious  letter  of 
his  most  sacred  majesty;  and  he  who  re- 
veres our  [sic  in  Greek,  "  your,"  in  Latin] 
holiness,  being  the  governor  (ctt/xxt^yo?)  of 
my  province  of  Sicily,  sent  me  to  Rome 
with  the  pious  jussio  of  our  orthodox 
Emperors.1 

And  when  we  were  gone,  we  announced 
the  orthodox  faith  of  the  pious  emperors. 

And  when  the  most  blessed  Pope  heard 
it,  he  said  :  Since  this  has  come  to  pass  in 
the  days  of  their  reign,  God  has  magnified 
their  pious  rule  above  all  former  reigns.  And 
this  suggestion  (ava<f>opav)  which  has  been 
read  he  sent  to  our  most  pious  kings  to- 
gether with  a  letter  to  your  holiness  and 
with  his  vicars  who  are  here  present  and 
presiding. 

Cosmas,  the  deacon,  notary,  and  cham- 
berlain ( Cubuclesius)  said  :  And  another 
letter  was  sent  by  the  most  holy  Pope  of 
Old  Rome  to  Tarasius,  our  most  holy  and 
oecumenical  Patriarch.  Let  it  be  disposed 
of  as  your  holy  assembly  shall  direct. 

The  Holy  Synod  said,  Let  it  be  read. 

[Then  was  read  Hadrian'' 's  letter  to  Tara- 
sius of  Constantinople,  lohich  ends  by  say- 
ing that,  "  our  dearly-loved  proto-presbyter 
of  the  Holy  Church  of  Rome,  and  Peter,  a 
monk,  a  presbyter,  and  an  abbot,  who  have 
been  sent  by  us  to  the  most  tranquil  and 
pious  emperors,  we  beg  you  will  deem  them 
worthy  of  all  kindness  and  humane  amenity 
for  the  sake  of  St.  Peter,  coropheus  of  the 
Apostles,  and  for  oxir  sakes,  so  that 
for  this  wre  may  be  able  to  offer  you  our 
sincere  thanks."  2  The  letter  being  ended 
(col.  128),] 

Peter  and  Peter,  the  most  reverend  pres- 
byters arjd  representatives  of  the  most  holy 

1  The  meaning  of  the  passage  is  obscure,  hut  Mendham's  trans- 
lation seems  clearly  wrong. 

2  Compare  with  this  the  statement  of  the  famous  historian,  Gib- 
bon (.Chapter  XLIX.,  N.  79),  "The  pope's  legates  were  casual 


Pope  of  Old  Rome  said  :  Let  the  most  holy 
Tarasius,  Patriarch  of  the  royal  city,  say 
whether  he  agrees  (aToi^el)  with  the  letters 
of  the  most  holy  Pope  of  Old  Rome  or 
not. 

Tarasius  the  most  holy  patriarch  said : 
The  divine  Apostle  Paul,  who  was  filled  with 
the  light  of  Christ,  and  who  hath  begotten 
us  through  the  gospel,  in  writing  to  the 
Romans,  commending  their  zeal  for  the 
true  faith  which  they  had  in  Christ  our 
true  God,  thus  said :  "  Your  faith  is  gone 
forth  into  all  the  world."  It  is  necessary 
to  follow  out  this  witness,  and  he  that  would 
contradict  it  is  without  good  sense.  "Where- 
fore Hadrian,  the  ruler  of  Old  Rome,  since 
he  was  a  sharer  of  these  things,  thus  borne 
witness  to,  wrote  expressly  and  truly  to  our 
religious  Emperors,  and  to  our  humility, 
confirming  admirably  and  beautifully  the 
ancient  tradition  of  the  Catholic  Church. 
And  we  also  ourselves,  having  examined 
both  in  writing,3  and  by  inquisition,  and 
syllogistically  and  by  demonstration,  and 
having  been  taught  by  the  teachings  of  the 
Fathers,  so  have  confessed,  so  do  confess, 
and  so  will  confess ;  and  shall  be  fast,  and 
shall  remain,  and  shall  stand  firm  in  the 
sense  of  the  letters  which  have  just  been 
read,  receiving  the  imaged  representations 
according  to  the  ancient  tradition  of  our 
holy  fathers ;  and  these  we  venerate  with 
firmly-attached'  affection,  as  made  in  the 
name  of  Christ  our  God,  and  of  our  Spot- 
less Lady  the  Holy  Mother  of  God,  and 
of  the  Holy  Angels,  and  of  all  the  Saints, 
most  clearly  giving  our  adoration  and  faith 
to  the  one  only  true  God. 

And  the  holy  Synod  said :  The  whole  holy 
Synod  thus  teaches. 


messengers,  two  priests  without  any  special  commission,  and  who 
were  disavowed  on  their  return.  'Some  vagabond  monks  were 
persuaded  by  the  Catholics  to  represent  the  Oriental  patriarchs. 
This  curious  anecdote  is  revealed  by  Theodore  Studites,  one  of 
the  warmest  Iconoclasts  of  the  age."  And  yet  to  this  tissue  of 
false  statements  Bury,  in  his  just-published  edition  of  Gibbon 
(1S9S),  has  no  note  of  correction  to  make  !  And  this  has  passed, 
and  will  pass,  for  history  among  the  overwhelming  majority  of 
English  readers  !  Nor  does  there  seem  to  be  any  possible  excuse 
for  Gibbon  in  either  particular,  the  first  statement  is  proved 
to  be  false  by  the  letters  of  Hadrian,  the  second  statement  is 
equally  disproved  by  the  letters  of  the  "  high  priests  of  the 
East,"  in  which  it  is  quite  clear  that  no  claim  was  set  up  that 
they  represented  the  Patriarchs,  but  the  Patriarchates,  wbich  they 
did,  as  they  proved,  in  a  very  real  sense.  This  letter  Gibbon 
must  have  seen,  if  indeed  he  ever  took  the  trouble  to  read  the  Acts, 
for  it  is  spread  out  in  full  in  Actio  Secunda  and  was  read  at 
length  to  the  Council. 

3  Mendham  here  has  translated  "  The  Scriptures,"  following  the 
Latin,  the  Greek  is  ypeujwews. 

4  Mendham  translates  <7x«ti/c<?  ' '  relative,"  which  is  a  quite  possi- 
ble rendering. 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


539 


Peter  and  Peter,  the  God-loved  presby- 
ters and  legates  of  the  Apostolic  See,  said : 
Let  the  holy  Synod  say  whether  it  receives 
the  letters  of  the  most  holy  Pope  of  Old 
Koine. 


The  holy  Synod  said  :  We  follow,  we  re- 
ceive, we  admit  them. 

[The  bishops  then  give  one  by  one  their 
votes  all  in  the  same  sense.] 


EXTRACTS  FROM  THE  ACTS. 


SESSION  III. 
(Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  VII.,  col.  188.) 


Constantine,  the  most  holy  bishop  of 
Constantia  in  Cyprus,  said:  Since  I,  un- 
worthy that  I  am,  find  that  the  letter  which 
has  just  been  read,  which  was  sent  from  the 
East  to  Tarasius  the  most  holy  archbishop 
and  ecumenical  patriarch,  is  in  no  sense 
changed  from  that  confession  of  faith  which 
he  himself  had  before  made,  to  these  I  con- 
sent and  become  of  one  mind,  receiving  and 
saluting  with  honour  the  holy  and  venerable 


images.  But  the  worship  of  adoration  I  re- 
serve alone  to  the  supersubstantial  and  life- 
giving  Trinity.  And  those  who  are  not  so 
minded,  and  do  not  so  teach  I  cast  out  of 
the  holy  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church, 
and  I  smite  them  with  anathema,  and  I  de- 
liver them  over  to  the  lot  of  those  who  deny 
the  incarnation  and  the  bodily  economy  of 
Christ  our  true  God. 


NOTES. 


Hefele. 

(Hist  Councils,  Vol.  V,  p.  366.) 

By  false  translation  and  misunderstanding 
the  Frankish  bishops  subsequently  at  tho 
Synod  of  Frankfort,  a.d.  794,  and  also  in  the 
Carolingian  books  (iii.  17),  understood  this 
to  mean  that  a  demand  had  been  made  at 


Niceea  that  the  same  devotion  should  be  of- 
fered to  the  images  as  to  the  Most  Holy  Trin- 
ity. 

Under  these  circumstances  it  is  clear  that 
the  Franks  could  do  nothing  but  reject  the 
decrees.  I  have  treated  of  this  whole  matter 
elsewhere. 


EXTRACTS  FROM  THE  ACTS, 


SESSION    IV. 
(Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  VII.,  col.  204.) 


[Among  numerous  passages  of  the  Fathers 
one  was  read  from  a  sermon  by  St.  Gregory 
JVyssen  in  which  he  describes  a  painting  rep- 
resenting the  sacrifice  of  Isaac  and  tells  how 
he  could  not  pass  it  "without  tears."] 

The  most  glorious  princes  said :  See 
how  our  father  grieved  at  the  depicted  his- 
tory, even  so  that  he  wept. 

Basil,  the  most  holy  bishop  of  Ancyra, 
said :  Many  times  the  father  had  read  the 
story,  but  perchance  he  had  not  wept ;  but 
when  once  he  saw  it  painted,  he  wept. 

John  the  most  reverend  monk  and  pres- 
byter and  representative  of  the  Eastern  high 


priests,  said  :  If  to  such  a  doctor  the  picture 
was  helpful  and  drew  forth  tears,  how  much 
more  in  the  case  of  the  ignorant  and  simple 
will  it  bring  compunction  and  benefit. 

The  holy  Synod  said :  We  have  seen  in 
several  places  the  history  of  Abraham 
painted  as  the  father  says. 

Theodore  the  most  holy  bishop  of  Cata- 
nea,  said  :  If  the  holy  Gregory,  vigilant 1  in 
divine  cogitation,  was  moved  to  tears  at  the 
sight  of  the  story  of  Abraham,  how  much 
more  shall  a  painting  of  the  incarnation  of 
our  Lord  Christ,  who  for  us  was  made  man, 

1  It  is  impossible  in  English  to  reproduce  the  play  upon  the 
WOl'CiS  Fp/jyopios  6  YPfyopwp  eis  Ta  Gela  v oij^aTci,  k.  t.  A, 


540 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


move  the  beholders  to  their  profit  and  to 
tears  ? 

Tarasius  the  most  holy  Patriarch  said: 
Shall  we  not  weep  when  Ave  see  an  image  of 
our  crucified  Lord  ? 

The  holy  Synod  said :  We  shall  indeed 
— for  in  that  shall  be  found  perfectly  the 
profundity  of  the  abasement  of  the  incarnate 
God  for  our  sakes. 

[Post  nonnulla  apassage  is  read  from  St. 
Athanasius  in  lolrich  he  describes  the  mira- 
cles worked  at  Berytus,  after  which  there  is 
found  the  folloioing  (col.  224),] 

Tarasius,  the  most  holy  Patriarch,  said : 
But  perhaps  someone  will  say,  TVhy  do  not 
the  images  which  Ave  have  work  miracles  ? 
To  Avhich  Ave  ansAver,  that  as  the  Apostle 
has  said,  signs  are  for  those  who  do  not  be- 
lieve, not  for  believers.  For  they  Avho  ap- 
proached that  image  were  unbelieA7ers. 
Therefore  God  gave  them  a  sign  through 
the  image,  to  draAv  them  to  our  Christian 
faith.  But  "  an  evil  and  adulterous  gener- 
ation that  seeketh  after  a  sign  and  no  sign 
shall  be  given  it." 

[After  a  number  of  other  quotations,  ivas 
read  the  Canon  of  the  Council  in  Trullo  as 
a  canon  of  the  Sixth  Synod  (col.  233).] 

Tarasius,  the  most  holy  Patriarch  said  : 
There  are  certain  affected  Avith  the  sickness 
of  ignorance  who  are  scandalized  by  these 
canons  [viz.  of  the  Trullan  Synod]  and  say, 
And  do  you  really  think  they  Avere  adopted 
at  the  Sixth  Synod  ?  Now  let  all  such  know 
that  the  holy  great  Sixth  Synod  Avas  assem- 
bled at  Constantinople  concerning  those 
who  said  that  there  Avas  but  one  energy  and 
will  in  Christ.  These  anathematized  the 
heretics,  and  having  expounded  the  ortho- 
dox faith,  they  Avent  to  their  homes  in  the 
fourteenth  year  of  Constantine.  But  after 
four  or  five  years  the  same l  fathers  came 
together  under  Justinian,  the  son  of  Con- 
stantine, and  set  forth  the  before-mentioned 
canons.  And  let  no  one  doubt  concerning 
them.  For  they  Avho  subscribed  under 
Constantine  Avere  the  same  as  they  Avho 
under  Justinian  signed  the  present  chart, 
as  can  manifestly  be  established  from  the 
unchangeable  similarity  of  their  oavu  hand- 


1  We  have  seen  that  this  is  an  error. 
Trullan  Canons. 


Vide  Introduction  to 


writing.  For  it  Avas  right  that  they  Avho 
had  appeared  at  an  ecumenical  synod 
should  also  set  forth  ecclesiastical  canons. 
They  said  that  we  should  be  led  as  (by  the 
hand)  by  the  venerable  images  to  the  recol- 
lection of  the  incarnation  of  Christ  and  of 
his  saving  death,  and  if  by  them  we  are  led 
to  the  realization  of  the  incarnation  of  Christ 
our  God,  what  sort  of  an  opinion  shall  Ave 
have  of  them  Avho  break  down  the  venerable 
images? 

[At  the  close  of  the  Session,  after  a  num- 
ber of  anathematisrtiH  had  been  p?'onounced, 
the  following  xoas  read,  to  which  cdl  the 
bishops  subscribed  (col.  317).] 

Fulfilling  the  divine  precept  of  our  God 
and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  our  holy  Fathers 
did  not  hide  the  light  of  the  divine  knoAvl- 
edge  given  by  him  to  them  under  a  bushel, 
but  they  set  it  upon  the  candlestick  of 
most  useful  teaching,  so  that  it  might  give 
light  to  all  in  the  house — that  is  to  say,  to 
those  who  are  born  in  the  Catholic  Church  ; 
lest  perchance  anyone  of  those  who  piously 
confess  the  Lord  might  strike  his  foot 
against  the  stone  of  heretical  evil  doctrine. 
For  they  expelled  every  error  of  heretics 
and  the}7  cut  off  the  rotten  member  if  it  Avas 
incurably  sick.  And  with  a  fan  they  purged 
the  floor.  And  the  good  Avheat,  that  is  to 
say  the  word  which  nourisheth  and  AA'hich 
maketh  strong  the  heart  of  man,  they  laid 
lip  in  the  granary  of  the  Catholic  Church ; 
but  throAving  outside  the  chaff  of  heretical 
evil  opinion  they  burned  it  with  unquench- 
able fire.  Therefore  also  this  holy  and  ecu- 
menical Synod,  met  together  for  the  second 
time  in  this  illustrious  metropolis  of  Nice, 
by  the  will  of  God  and  at  the  bidding  of 
our  pious  and  most  faithful  Emperors,  Irene 
a  new  Helena,  and  a  neAV  Constantine,  her 
God-protected  offspring,  having  considered 
by  their  perusal  the  teachings  of  our  ap- 
proved and  blessed  Fathers,  hath  glorified 
God  himself,  from  whom  there  was  given  to 
them  wisdom  for  our  instruction,  and  for 
the  perfecting  of  the  Catholic  and  Apostolic 
Church  :  and  against  those  Avho  do  not  be- 
lieve as  they  did,  but  haAre  attempted  to 
overshadow  the  truth  through  their  novelty, 
they  have  chanted  the  words  of  the  psalm  : 2 
"  Oh  how  much  evil  have  thine  enemies  done 

2  The  reference  is  to  Ps.  Ixxiv,  3,  but  the  text  is  quite  different 
from  ours. 


II.  NICE.    A.D.  787 


541 


in  thy  sanctuary  ;  and  have  glorified  them- 
selves, saying,  There  is  not  a  teacher  any 
more,  and  they  shall  not  know  that  we 
treated  with  guile  the  word  of  truth."  But 
we,  in  all  things  holding  the  doctrines  and 
precepts  of  the  same  our  God-bearing  Fath- 
ers, make  proclamation  with  one  mouth  and 
one  heart,  neither  adding  anything,  nor  tak- 
ing anything  away  from  those  things  which 
have  been  delivered  to  us  by  them.  But  in 
these  things  we  are  strengthened,  in  these 
things  we  are  confirmed.  Thus  we  confess, 
thus  we  teach,  just  as  the  holy  and  ecumen- 
ical six  Synods  have  decreed  and  ratified. 
"We  believe  in  one  God  the  Father  Almighty, 
maker  of  all  things  visible  and  invisible ; 
and  in  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  his  only -be- 
gotten Son  and  Word,  through  whom  all 
things  were  made,  and  in  the  Holy  Ghost, 
the  Lord  and  giver  of  life,  consubstantial 
and  coeternal  with  the  same  Father  and 
with  his  Son  who  hath  had  no  beginning. 
The  unbuilt-up,  indivisible,  incomprehen- 
sible, and  non-circumscribed  Trinity ;  he, 
wholly  and  alone,  is  to  be  worshipped  and 
revered  with  adoration ;  one  Godhead,  one 
Lordship,  one  dominion,  one  realm  and  dy- 
nasty, which  without  division  is  appor- 
tioned to  the  Persons,  and  is  fitted  to  the 
essence  severally.  For  we  confess  that  one 
of  the  same  holy  and  consubstantial  Trin- 
ity, our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  the  true  God,  in 
these  last  days  was  incarnate  and  made 
man  for  our  salvation,  and  having  saved  our 
race  through  his  saving  incarnation,  and 
passion,  and  resurrection,  and  ascension 
into  heaven ;  and  having  delivered  us  from 
the  error  of  idols ;  as  also  the  prophet  says, 
Not  an  ambassador,  not  an  angel,  but  the 
Lord  himself  hath  saved  us.  Him  we  also 
follow,  and  adopt  his  voice,  and  cry  aloud ; 
No  Synod,  no  power  of  kings,  no  God-hated 
agreement  hath  delivered  the  Church  from 
the  error  of  the  idols,  as  the  Jewdaizing 
conciliabulum  hath  madly  dreamed,  which 
raved  against  the  venerable  images ;  but 
the  Lord  of  glory  himself,  the  incarnate 
God,  hath  saved  us  and  hath  snatched  us 
from  idolatrous  deceit.  To  him  therefore 
be  glory,  to  him  be  thanks,  to  him  be  eu- 
charists,  to  him  be  praise,  to  him  be  mag- 
nificence. For  his  redemption  and  his  sal- 
vation alone  can  perfectly  save,  and  not  that 
of  other  men  who  come  of  the  earth.  For 
he  himself  hath  fulfilled  for  us,  upon  whom 
the  ends  of  the  earth  are  come  through  the 


economy    of    his    incarnation,   the    words 
,  spoken  beforehand  by  his  prophets,  for  he 
dwelt  among  us,   and  went    in   and  out 
'  among  us,  and  cast  out  the  names  of  idols 
;  from  the  earth,  as  it  was  written.     But  we 
[  salute  the  voices  of  the  Lord  and  of  his 
|  Apostles  through  which  Ave  have  been  taught 
to  honour  in  the  first  place  her  who  is  prop- 
erly and  truly  the  Mother  of  God  and  ex- 
I  alted  above  all  the  heavenly  powers  ;  also 
i  the  holy  and  angelic  powers ;  and  the  bless- 
I  ed  and  altogether  lauded  Apostles,  and  the 
!  glorious  Prophets  and  the  triumphant  Mar- 
;  tyrs  which  fought  for  Christ,  and  the  holy 
and  God-bearing  Doctors,  and  all  holy  men ; 
and  to  seek  for  their  intercessions,  as  able 
to  render  us  at  home  with  the  all-royal  God 
of  all,  so  long  as  we  keep  his  command- 
ments, and  strive  to  live  virtuously.     More- 
over we  salute  the  image  of  the  honourable 
and  life-giving  Cross,  and  the  holy  reliques 
of  the  Saints ;  and  we  receive  the  holy  and 
venerable  images  :  and  we  salute  them,  and 
we  embrace  them,  according  to  the  ancient 
traditions  of  the  holy  Catholic  Church  of 
God,  that  is  to  say  of  our  holy  Fathers,  who 
also  received  these  things  and  established 
them  in  all  the  most  holy  Churches  of  God, 
and  in  every  place  of  his  dominion.    These 
honourable  and  venerable  images,  as  has 
been  said,  we  honour  and  salute  and  rever- 
ently venerate  :  to  wit,  the  image  of  the 
incarnation  of  our  great  God  and  Saviour 
Jesus  Christ,  and  that  of  our  spotless  Lady 
the  all-holy  Mother  of  God,  from  whom  he 
pleased  to  take  flesh,  and  to  save  and  de- 
liver us  from  all  impious  idolatry  ;  also  the 
images  of  the  holy  and  incorporeal  Angels, 
who  as  men  appeared  to  the  just.     Like- 
wise also  the  figures  and  effigies  of  the  di- 
vine and  all-lauded  Apostles,  also  of  the 
God-speaking  Prophets,  and  of  the  strug- 
gling Martyrs  and  :>f  holy  men.     So  that 
through  their  representations  we  may  be 
able  to  be  led  back  in  memory  and  recol- 
lection to  the  prototype,  and  have  a  share 
in  the  holiness  of  some  one  of  them. 

Thus  we  have  learned  to  think  of  these 
things,  and  Ave  have  been  strengthened  by 
our  holy  Fathers,  and  Ave  have  been 
strengthened  by  their  divinely  handed  down 
teaching.  And  thanks  be  to  God  for  his 
ineffable  gift,  that  he  hath  not  deserted  us 
at  the  end  nor  hath  the  rod  of  the  ungodly 
come  into  the  lot  of  the  righteous,  lest  the 
righteous  put  their  hands,  that  is  to  say 


542 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


their  actual  deeds,1  unto  wickedness.  But 
he  doeth  well  unto  those  who  are  good  and 
true  of  heart,  as  the  psalmist  David  melo- 
diously has  sung  ;  with  whom  also  we  sing 
the  rest  of  the  psalm :  As  for  such  as  turn 
back  unto  their  own  wickedness,  the  Lord 


shall  lead  them  forth  with  the  evil  doers  ; 
and  peace  shall  be  upon  the  Israel  of  God. 

[The  subscriptions  follow  immediately 
and  close  the  acts  of  this  session  (col.  321- 
346).] 


EXTRACTS  FROM  THE  ACTS. 


SESSION  VI. 


(Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  VII.,  col.  389.) 


Leo  the  most  renowned  secretary  said  : 
The  holy  and  blessed  Synod  know  how  at 
the  last  session  we  examined  divers  sayings 
of  the  God -forsaken  heretics,  who  had 
brought  charges  against  the  holy  and  spot- 
less Church  of  the  Christians  for  the  set- 
ting up  of  the  holy  images.  But  to-day  we 
have  in  our  hands  the  written  blasphemy 
of  those  calumniators  of  the  Christians,  that 
is  to  say,  the  absurd,  and  easily  answered, 
and  self-convicting  definition  (opov)  of  the 
pseudosyllogus,  in  all  respects  agreeing 
with  the  impious  opinion  of  the  God-hated 
heretics.  But  not  only  have  we  this,  but 
also  the  artful  and  most  drastic  refutation 
thereof,  which  the  Holy  Spirit  had  super- 


vised. For  it  was  right  that  this  definition 
should  be  made  a  triumph  by  wise  contra- 
dictions, and  should  be  torn  to  pieces  with 
strong  refutations.  This  also  we  submit  so 
as  to  know  your  pleasure  with  regard  to  it. 

The  holy  Synod  said  :  Let  it  be  read. 

John,  the  deacon  and  chancellor  [of  the 
most  holy  great  Church  of  Constantinople, 
in  Lat.  only]  read. 


[John,  the  deacon,  then  read  the  orthodox 


the  one  reading  the  heretical  statement  and 
the  other  the  orthodox  answer.'] 


1  This  obscure  phrase  Mendham  omits  altogether. 


EPITOME    OF    THE    DEFINITION    OF   THE    ICONOCLASTIC    CONCILIA- 
BULUM,  HELD  IN  CONSTANTINOPLE,  A.D.  754.1 


THE  DEFINITION  OF  THE   HOLY,   GREAT,   AND  ECUMENICAL  SEVENTH   SYNOD. 


The  holy  and  Ecumenical  synod,  which  by 
the  grace  of  God  and  most  pious  command 
of  the  God-beloved  and  orthodox  Emperors, 
Constantine  and  Leo,2  now  assembled  in  the 
imperial  residence  city,  in  the  temple  of  the 
holy  and  inviolate  Mother  of  God  and  Vir- 
gin Mary,  surnamed  in  Blachernae,  have 
decreed  as  follows. 

Satan  misguided  men,  so  that  they  wor- 
shipped the  creature  instead  of  the  Crea- 
tor. The  Mosaic  law  and  the  prophets  co- 
operated to  undo  this  ruin  ;  but  in  order  to 
save  mankind  thoroughly,  God  sent  his 
own  Son,  who  turned  us  away  from  error 
and  the  worshipping  of  idols,  and  taught 
us  the  worshipping  of  God  in  spirit  and 
in  truth.  As  messengers  of  his  saving  doc- 
trine, he  left  us  his  Apostles  and  disciples, 
and  these  adorned  the  Church,  his  Bride, 
with  his  glorious  doctrines.  This  orna- 
ment of  the  Church  the  holy  Fathers  and 
the  six  Ecumenical  Councils  have  preserved 
inviolate.  But  the  before-mentioned  demi- 
urgos  of  wickedness  could  not  endure  the 
sight  of  this  adornment,  and  gradually 
brought  back  idolatry  under  the  appearance 
of  Christianity.  As  then  Christ  armed  his 
Apostles  against  the  ancient  idolatry  with 
the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  sent  them 
out  into  all  the  world,  so  has  he  awakened 
against  the  new  idolatry  his  servants  our 
faithful  Emperors,  and  endowed  them  with 
the  same  wisdom  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Im- 
pelled by  the  Holy  Spirit  they  could  no 
longer  be  witnesses  of  the  Church  being- 
laid  waste  by  the  deception  of  demons,  and 
summoned  the  sanctified  assembly  of  the 
God-beloved  bishops,  that  they  might  in- 
stitute at  a  synod  a  scriptural  examination 
into  the  deceitful  colouring  of  the  pictures 
(o/xoico/jbaTcov)  which  draws  down  the  spirit 
of  man  from  the  lofty  adoration  (XaTpeLas) 
of  God  to  the  low  and  material  adoration 
(Xarpelav)  of  the  creature,  and  that  they, 
under  divine  guidance,  might  express  their 
view  on  the  subject. 

Our  holy  synod  therefore  assembled,  and 


we,  its  338  members,  follow  the  older  sy- 
nodal decrees,  and  accept  and  proclaim  joy- 
fully the  dogmas  handed  down,  principally 
those  of  the  six  holy  Ecumenical  Synods. 
In  the  first  place  the  holy  and  ecumenical 
great  synod  assembled  at  Nice,  etc. 

After  we  had  carefully  examined  their 
decrees  under  the  guidance  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  we  found  that  the  unlawful  art  of 
painting  living  creatures  blasphemed  the 
fundamental  doctrine  of  our  salvation — 
namely,  the  Incarnation  of  Christ,  and  con- 
tradicted the  six  holy  synods.  These  con- 
demned Nestorius  because  he  divided  the 
one  Son  and  Word  of  God  into  two  sons, 
and  on  the  other  side,  Arius,  Dioscorus, 
Eutyches,  and  Severus,  because  they  main- 
tained a  mingling  of  the  two  natures  of  the 
one  Christ. 

Wherefore  we  thought  it  right,  to  shew 
forth  with  all  accuracy,  in  our  present  defi- 
nition the  error  of  such  as  make  and  ven- 
erate these,  for  it  is  the  unanimous  doc- 
trine of  all  the  holy  Fathers  and  of  the  six 
Ecumenical  Synods,  that  no  one  may  imag- 
ine any  kind  of  separation  or  mingling  in 
opposition  to  the  unsearchable,  unspeak- 
able, and  incomprehensible  union  of  the 
two  natures  in  the  one  hypostasis  or  per- 
son. What  avails,  then,  the  folly  of  the 
painter,  who  from  sinful  love  of  gain  de- 
picts that  which  should  not  be  depicted — 
that  is,  with  his  polluted  hands  he  tries  to 
fashion  that  which  should  only  be  believed 
in  the  heart  and  confessed  with  the  mouth  ? 
He  makes  an  image  and  calls  it  Christ. 
The  name  Christ  signifies  God  and  man. 
Consequently  it  is  an  image  of  God  and 
man,  and  consequently  he  has  in  his  fool- 
ish mind,  in  his  representation  of  the  cre- 
ated flesh,  depicted  the  Godhead  which  can- 
not be  represented,  and  thus  mingled  what 
should  not  be  mingled.  Thus  he  is  guilty 
of  a  double  blasphemy — the  one  in  making 
an  image  of  the  Godhead,  and  the  other  by 
mingling  the  Godhead  and  manhood.  Those 
fall  into  the  same  blasphemy  who  venerate 


1  In  this  epitome  of  the  verbose  definition  of  the  council,  I  have  followed  for  the  most  part  Hefele.    (Hist,  of  the  Councils,  Vol. 
V.,  p.  309  ef  seqq.) 

2  Now  four  years  old. 


544 


CONCILIABULUM   OF   C.  P.     A.D.  754 


the  image,  and  the  same  "\voe  rests  upon 
both,  because  they  err  with  Arius,  Dioscorus, 
and  Eutyches,  and  with  the  heresy  of  the 
Acephali.  When,  however,  they  are  blamed 
for  undertaking  to  depict  the  divine  nature  of 
Christ,  which  should  not  be  depicted,  they 
take  refuge  in  the  excuse  :  We  represent 
only  the  flesh  of  Christ  which  we  have  seen 
and  handled.  But  that  is  a  Nestorian  error. 
For  it  should  be  considered  that  that  flesh 
was  also  the  flesh  of  God  the  Word,  with- 
out any  separation,  perfectly  assumed  by 
the  divine  nature  and  made  wholly  divine. 
How  could  it  now  be  separated  and  repre- 
sented apart  ?  So  is  it  with  the  human 
soul  of  Christ  which  mediates  between  the 
Godhead  of  the  Son  and  the  dulness  of  the 
flesh.  As  the  human  flesh  is  at  the  same 
time  flesh  of  God  the  Word,  so  is  the  hu- 
man soul  also  soul  of  God  the  Word,  and 
both  at  the  same  time,  the  soul  being  dei- 
fied as  well  as  the  body,  and  the  Godhead 
remained  undivided  even  in  the  separation 
of  the  soul  from  the  body  in  his  voluntary 
passion.  For  where  the  soul  of  Christ  is, 
there  is  also  his  Godhead ;  and  where  the 
body  of  Christ  is,  there  too  is  his  God- 
head. If  then  in  his  passion  the  divinity  re- 
mained inseparable  from  these,  how  do  the 
fools  venture  to  separate  the  flesh  from 
the  Godhead,  and  represent  it  by  itself  as 
the  image  of  a  mere  man  ?  They  fall  into 
the  abyss  of  impiety,  since  they  separate  the 
flesh  from  the  Godhead,  ascribe  to  it  a 
subsistence  of  its  own,  a  personality  of  its 
own,  which  they  depict,  and  thus  introduce 
a  fourth  person  into  the  Trinity.  More- 
over, they  represent  as  not  being  made  di- 
vine, that  which  has  been  made  divine  by 
being  assumed  by  the  Godhead.  Whoever, 
then,  makes  an  image  of  Christ,  either  de- 
picts the  Godhead  which  cannot  be  depict- 
ed, and  mingles  it  with  the  manhood  (like 
the  Monophysites),  or  he  represents  the 
body  of  Christ  as  not  made  divine  and  sep- 
arate and  as  a  person  apart,  like  the  Nesto- 
rians. 

The  only  admissible  figure  of  the  human- 
ity of  Christ,  however,  is  bread  and  wine  in 
the  holy  Supper.  This  and  no  other  form, 
this  and  no  other  type,  has  he  chosen  to 
represent  his  incarnation.  Bread  he  or- 
dered to  be  brought,  but  not  a  representa- 
tion of  the  human  form,  so  that  idolatry 
might  not  arise.  And  as  the  body  of  Christ 
is  made  divine,  so  also  this  figure  of  the 


body  of  Christ,  the  bread,  is  made  divine  by 
the  descent  of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  it  becomes 
the  divine  body  of  Christ  by  the  mediation 
of  the  priest  who,  separating  the  oblation 
from  that  which  is  common,  sanctifies  it. 

The  evil  custom  of  assigning  names  to 
the  images  does  not  come  doAvn  from  Christ 
and  the  Apostles  and  the  holy  Fathers  ;  nor 
have  these  left  behind  them  any  prayer  by 
which  an  image  should  be  hallowed  or 
made  anything  else  than  ordinary  matter. 

If,  however,  some  say,  we  might  be  right 
in  regard  to  the  images  of  Christ,  on  ac- 
count of  the  mysterious  union  of  the  two 
natures,  but  it  is  not  right  for  us  to  forbid 
also  the  images  of  the  altogether  spotless 
and  ever-glorious  Mother  of  God,  of  the 
prophets,  apostles,  and  martyrs,  who  were 
mere  men  and  did  not  consist  of  two  nat- 
ures ;  we  may  reply,  first  of  all :  If  those 
fall  away,  there  is  no  longer  need  of  these. 
But  we  will  also  consider  what  may  be  said 
against  these  in  particular.  Christianity 
has  rejected  the  ivlwlc  of  heathenism,  and 
so  not  merely  heathen  sacrifices,  but  also 
the  heathen  worship  of  images.  The  Saints 
live  on  eternally  with  God,  although  they 
have  died.  If  anyone  thinks  to  call  them 
back  again  to  life  by  a  dead  art,  discovered 
by  the  heathen,  he  makes  himself  guilty  of 
blasphemy.  Who  dares  attempt  with  hea- 
thenish art  to  paint  the  Mother  of  God, 
who  is  exalted  above  all  heavens  and  the 
Saints  ?  It  is  not  permitted  to  Christians, 
who  have  the  hope  of  the  resurrection,  to 
imitate  the  customs  of  demon-worshippers, 
and  to  insult  the  Saints,  who  shine  in  so 
great  glory,  by  common  dead  matter. 

Moreover,  we  can  prove  our  view  by  Holy 
Scripture  and  the  Fathers.  In  the  former 
it  is  said  :  "  God  is  a  Spirit :  and  they  that 
worship  him  must  worship  him  in  spirit 
and  in  truth;"  and:  "  Thou  shalt  not  make 
thee  any  graven  image,  or  any  likeness  of 
any  thing  that  is  in  heaven  above,  or  that  is 
in  the  earth  beneath;"  on  which  account 
God  spoke  to  the  Israelites  on  the  Mount, 
from  the  midst  of  the  fire,  but  showed  them 
no  image.  Further:  "They  changed  the 
glory  of  the  incorruptible  God  into  an  image 
made  like  to  corruptible  man,  .  .  .  and 
served  the  creature  more  than  the  Creator." 
[Several  other  passages,  even  less  to  the  point, 
are  cited.']  l 

1  These  are  Hefele's  words. 


CONCILIABULUM   OF   0.  P.     A.D.  754 


545 


The  same  is  taught  also  by  the  holy 
Fathers.  {The  Synod  appeals  to  a  spuri- 
ous passage  from  Epiphanius  and  to  one 
inserted  into  the  writings  of  Theodotus  of 
Ancyra,  a  friend  of  St.  Cyril's  ;  to  utter 
ances — in  no  way  striking — of  Gregory  of 
Nazianzum,  of  SS.  Ghrysostom,  Basil, 
Athanasius,  of  Amphilochius  and  of  Euse- 
bius  Pamphili,  from  his  Letter  to  the  Em- 
press Constantia,  who  had  asked  him  for  a 
picture  of  Christ.] l 

Supported  by  the  Holy  Scriptures  and 
the  Fathers,  we  declare  unanimously,  in  the 
name  of  the  Holy  Trinity,  that  there  shall 
be  rejected  and  removed  and  cursed  out  of 
the  Christian  Church  every  likeness  which 
is  made  out  of  any  material  and  colour 
whatever  by  the  evil  art  of  painters. 

Whoever  in  future  dares  to  make  such  a 
thing,  or  to  venerate  it,  or  set  it  up  in  a 
church,  or  in  a  private  house,  or  possesses 
it  in  secret,  shall,  if  bishop,  presbyter,  or 
deacon,  be  deposed;  if  monk  or  layman, 
be  anathematised,  and  become  liable  to  be 
tried  by  the  secular  laws  as  an  adversary  of 
God  and  an  enemy  of  the  doctrines  handed 
down  by  the  Fathers.  At  the  same  time 
we  ordain  that  no  incumbent  of  a  church 
shall  venture,  under  pretext  of  destroying 
the  error  in  regard  to  images,  to  lay  his 
hands  on  the  holy  vessels  in  order  to  have 
them  altered,  because  they  are  adorned 
with  figures.  The  same  is  provided  in  re- 
gard to  the  vestments  of  churches,  cloths, 
and  all  that  is  dedicated  to  divine  service. 
If,  however,  the  incumbent  of  a  church 
wishes  to  have  such  church  vessels  and 
vestments  altered,  he  must  do  this  only 
with  the  assent  of  the  holy  Ecumenical 
patriarch  and  at  the  biddiug  of  our  pious 
Emperors.  So  also  no  prince  or  secular 
official  shall  rob  the  churches,  as  some  have 
done  in  former  times,  under  the  pretext  of 
destroying  images.  All  this  we  ordain,  be- 
lieving that  we  speak  as  doth  the  Apostle, 
for  we  also  believe  that  we  have  the  spirit 
of  Christ ;  and  as  our  predecessors  who 
believed  the  same  thing  spake  what  they 
had  synodically  defined,  so  we  believe  and 
therefore  do  we  speak,  and  set  forth  a  def- 
inition of  what  has  seemed  good  to  us  fol- 
lowing and  in  accordance  with  the  defini- 
tions of  our  Fathers. 

(1)  If  anyone  shall  not  confess,  according 


1  These  are  Hefele's  words. 


to  the  tradition  of  the  Apostles  and  Fathers, 
in  the  Father,  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Ghost 
one  godhead,  nature  and  substance,  will  and 
operation,  virtue  and  dominion,  kingdom 
and  power  in  three  subsistences,  that  is  in 
their  most  glorious  Persons,  let  him  be 
anathema. 

(2)  If  anyone  does  not  confess  that  one 
of  the  Trinity  was  made  flesh,  let  him  be 
anathema. 

(3)  If  anyone  does  not  confess  that  the 
holy  Virgin  is  truly  the  Mother  of  God,  etc. 

(4)  If  anyone  does  not  confess  one  Christ 
both  God  and  man,  etc. 

(5)  If  anyone  does  not  confess  that  the 
flesh  of  the  Lord  is  life-giving  because  it 
is  the  flesh  of  the  Word  of  God,  etc. 

(6)  If  anyone  does  not  confess  two  nat- 
ures in  Christ,  etc. 

(7)  If  anyone  does  not  confess  that  Christ 
is  seated  with  God  the  Father  in  body  and 
soul,  and  so  will  come  to  judge,  and  that  he 
will  remain  God  forever  without  any  gross- 
ness,  etc. 

(8)  If  anyone  ventures  to  represent  the 
divine  image  (^apa/cri^p)  of  the  Word  after 
the  Incarnation  with  material  colours,  let 
him  be  anathema ! 

(9)  If  anyone  ventures  to  represent  in 
human  figures,  by  means  of  material  colours, 
by  reason  of  the  incarnation,  the  substance 
or  person  (pusia  or  hypostasis)  of  the  Word, 
which  cannot  be  depicted,  and  does  not 
rather  confess  that  even  after  the  Incarna- 
tion he  [i.e.,  the  Word]  cannot  be  depicted, 
let  him  be  anathema ! 

(10)  If  anyone  ventures  to  represent  the 
hypostatic  union  of  the  two  natures  in  a 
picture,  and  calls  it  Christ,  and  thus  falsely 
represents  a  union  of  the  two  natures,  etc. ! 

(11)  If  anyone  separates  the  flesh  united 
with  the  person  of  the  Word  from  it,  and 
endeavours  to  represent  it  separately  in  a 
picture,  etc. ! 

(12)  If  anyone  separates  the  one  Christ 
into  two  persons,  and  endeavours  to  repre- 
sent Him  who  was  born  of  the  Virgin  sepa- 
rately, and  thus  accepts  only  a  relative 
(o-^eTt/o?)  union  of  the  natures,  etc. 

(13)  If  anyone  represents  in  a  picture  the 
flesh  deified  by  its  union  with  the  Word, 
and  thus  separates  it  from  the  Godhead, 
etc. 

(14)  If  anyone  endeavours  to  represent 
by  material  colours,  God  the  Word  as  a 
mere  man,  who,  although  bearing  the  form 


VOL,  xiv, 


n  n 


546 


CONCILIABULUM   OF  0.  P.    A.D.  754 


of  God,  yet  has  assumed  the  form  of  a  ser- 
vant in  his  own  person,  and  thus  endeavours 
to  separate  him  from  his  inseparable  God- 
head, so  that  he  thereby  introduces  a  qua- 
ternity  into  the  Holy  Trinity,  etc. 

(15)  If  anyone  shall  not  confess  the  holy 
ever-virgin  Mary,  truly  and  properly  the 
Mother  of  God,  to  be  higher  than  every 
creature  whether  visible  or  invisible,  and 
does  not  with  sincere  faith  seek  her  inter- 
cessions as  of  one  having  confidence  in  her 
access  to  our  God,  since  she  bare  him,  etc. 

(16)  If  anyone  shall  endeavour  to  repre- 
sent the  forms  of  the  Saints  in  lifeless  pict- 
ures with  material  colours  which  are  of  no 
value  (for  this  notion  is  vain  and  intro- 
duced by  the  devil),  and  does  not  rather 
represent  their  virtues  as  living  images  in 
himself,  etc. 

(17)  If  anyone  denies  the  profit  of  the 
invocation  of  Saints,  etc. 

(18)  If  anyone  denies  the  resurrection  of 
the  dead,  and  the  judgment,  and  the  con- 
dign retribution  to  everyone,  endless  tor- 
ment and  endless  bliss,  etc. 

(19)  If  anyone  does  not  accept  this  our 
Holy  and  Ecumenical  Seventh  Synod,  let 
him  be  anathema  from  the  Father  and  the 
Son  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  from  the 
seven  holy  Ecumenical  Synods ! 

[Then  follows  the  prohibition  of  the  mak- 
ing or  teaching  any  other  faith,  and  the 


penalties  for  disobedience, 
low  the  acclamations. .] 


After  thisfol- 


The  divine  Kings  Constantine  and  Leo 
said :  Let  the  holy  and  ecumenical  synod 
say,  if  with  the  consent  of  all  the  most  holy 
bishops  the  definition  just  read  has  been  set 
forth. 

The  holy  synod  cried  out :  Thus  we  all 
believe,  we  all  are  of  the  same  mind.  We 
have  all  with  one  voice  and  voluntarily  sub- 
scribed. This  is  the  faith  of  the  Apostles. 
Many  years  to  the  Emperors !  They  are 
the  light  of  orthodoxy !  Many  years  to  the 
orthodox  Emperors !  God  preserve  your 
Empire !  You  have  now  more  firmly  pro- 
claimed the  inseparability  of  the  two  natures 
of  Christ !  You  have  banished  all  idolatry ! 
You  have  destroyed  the  heresies  of  Ger- 
manus  [of  Constantinople],  George  and 
Mansur  [/xavaovp,  John  Damascene].  Anath- 
ema to  Germanus,  the  double-minded,  and 
worshipper  of  wood !  Anathema  to  George, 
his  associate,  to  the  falsifier  of  the  doctrine 
of  the  Fathers !  Anathema  to  Mansur,  who 
has  an  evil  name  and  Saracen  opinions !  To 
the  betrayer  of  Christ  and  the  enemy  of  the 
Empire,  to  the  teacher  of  impiety,  the  per- 
verter  of  Scripture,  Mansur,  anathema !  The 
Trinity  has  deposed  these  three ! l 

1  These  are  not  given  in  full  but  are  sufficient  to  give  the  true 


EXCURSUS  ON  THE  CONCILIABULUM  STYLING  ITSELF  THE  SEVENTH 
ECUMENICAL  COUNCIL,  BUT  COMMONLY  CALLED  THE  MOCK  SYNOD 
OF  CONSTANTINOPLE. 

A.D.  754. 


The  reader  will  find  all  the  information  he  desires  with  regard  to  the  great  iconoclastic 
controversy  in  the  ordinary  church-histories,  and  the  theological  side  of  the  matter  in  the 
writings  of  St.  John  Damascene.  It  seems,  however,  that  in  order  to  render  the  meaning  of 
the  action  of  the  last  of  the  Ecumenical  Councils  clear  it  is  necessary  to  provide  an  account  of 
the  synod  which  was  held  to  condemn  what  it  so  shortly  afterward  expressly  approved.  I 
quote  from  Hefele  in  loco,  and  would  only  further  draw  the  reader's  attention  to  the  fact  that 
the  main  thing  objected  to  was  not  (as  is  commonly  supposed)  the  outward  veneration  of  the 
sacred  icons,  but  the  making  and  setting  up  of  them,  as  architectural  ornaments  ;  and  that  it 
was  not  only  rejn-esentations  of  the  persons  of  the  Most  Holy  Trinity,  and  of  the  Divine 
Son  in  his  incarnate  form  that  were  denounced,  but  even  pictures  of  the  Blessed  Virgin  and 
of  the  other  saints ;  all  this  is  evident  to  anyone  reading  the  foregoing  abstract  of  the 
decree. 


CONCILIABULUM   OF  C.  P.     A.D.  754  547 

(Hefele,  History  of  the  Councils,  Vol.  V.,  p.  308  et  seqq.) 
The  Emperor,  after  the  death  of  the  Patriarch  Anastasius  (a.d.  753),  summoned  the  bishops 
of  his  Empire  to  a  great  synod  in  the  palace  Hieria,  which  lay  opposite  to  Constantinople  on 
the  Asiatic  side  of  the  Bosphorus,  between  Chrysopolis  and  Chalcedon,  a  little  to  the  north 
of  the  latter.  The  vacancy  of  the  patriarchate  facilitated  his  plans,  since  the  hope  of  succeed- 
ing to  this  see  kept  down,  in  the  most  ambitious  and  aspiring  of  the  bishops,  any  possible 
thought  of  opposition.  The  number  of  those  present  amounted  to  338  bishops,  and  the  place 
of  president  was  occupied  by  Archbishop  Theodosius  of  Ephesus,  already  known  to  us  as  son 
of  a  former  Emperor — Apsimar,  from  the  beginning  an  assistant  in  the  iconoclastic  movement. 
Nicephorus  names  him  alone  as  president  of  the  synod  ;  Theophanes,  on  the  contrary,  men- 
tions Bishop  Pastillas  of  Perga  as  second  president,  and  adds,  "  The  Patriarchates  of  Rome, 
Alexandria,  Antioch,  and  Jerusalem  were  not  represented  [the  last  three  were  then  in  the 
hands  of  the  Saracens],  the  transactions  began  on  February  10th,  and  lasted  until  August  8th 
(in  Hieria)  ;  on  the  latter  date,  however,  the  synod  assembled  in  St.  Mary's  Church  in 
Blachern£e,  the  northern  suburb  of  Constantinople,  and  the  Emperor  now  solemnly  nomi- 
nated Bishop  Constantine  of  Sylseum,  a  monk,  as  patriarch  of  Constantinople.  On  August 
27th,  the  heretical  decree  [of  the  Synod]  was  published." 

We  see  from  this  that  the  last  sessions  of  this  Conciliabulum  were  held  no  longer  in 
Hieria,  but  in  the  Blachernse  of  Constantinople.  We  have  no  complete  Acts  of  this  assem- 
bly, but  its  very  verbose  6'pos  (decree),  together  with  a  short  introduction,  is  preserved  among 
the  acts  of  the  Seventh  Ecumenical  Council. 

This  decree  was  by  no  means  suffered  to  remain  inoperative. 

(W.  M.  Sinclair.  Smith  and  Wace,  Dictionary  of  Chr.  Biog.,  sub  voce  Constantinus  VI.) 
The  Emperor  singled  out  the  more  noted  monks,  and  required  them  to  comply  with  the 
decrees  of  the  synod.  In  a.d.  766  he  exacted  an  oath  against  images  from  all  the  inhabitants 
of  the  empire.  The  monks  refused  with  violent  obstinacy,  and  Copronymus  appears  to  have 
amused  himself  by  treating  them  with  ruthless  harshness.  The  Emperor,  indeed,  seems  to 
have  contemplated  the  extirpation  of  monachism.  John  the  Damascene  he  persuaded  his 
bishops  to  excommunicate.  Monks  were  forced  to  appear  in  the  hippodrome  at  Constanti- 
nople hand  in  hand  with  harlots,  while  the  populace  spat  at  them.  The  new  patriarch  Con- 
stantinus, presented  by  the  emperor  to  the  council  the  last  day  of  its  session,  was  forced  to 
foreswear  images,  to  attend  banquets,  to  eat  and  drink  freely  against  his  monastic  vows,  to 
wear  garlands,  to  witness  the  coarse  spectacles  and  hear  the  coarse  language  which  enter- 
tained the  Emperor.  Monasteries  were  destroyed,  made  into  barracks,  or  secularized. 
Lachanodraco,  governor  of  the  Thracian  Theme,  seems  to  have  exceeded  Copronymus  in 
his  ribaldry  and  injustice.  He  collected  a  number  of  monks  into  a  plain,  clothed  them  with 
white,  presented  them  with  wives,  and  forced  them  to  choose  between  marriage  and  loss  of 
eyesight.  He  sold  the  property  of  the  monasteries,  and  sent  the  price  to  the  Emperor.  Co- 
pronymus publicly  thanked  him,  and  commended  his  example  to  other  governors. 

(Harnack.  History  of  Dogma,  Vol.  V,  p.  325  [Eng.  Tr.].) 
The  clergy  obeyed  when  the  decrees  were  published  ;  but  resistance  was  offered  in  the 
ranks  of  the  monks.  Many  took  to  flight,  some  became  martyrs.  The  imperial  police 
stormed  the  churches,  and  destroyed  those  images  and  pictures  that  had  not  been  secured. 
The  iconoclastic  zeal  by  no  means  sprang  from  enthusiasm  for  divine  service  in  spirit  and  in 
truth.  The  Emperor  now  also  directly  attacked  the  monks  ;  he  meant  to  extirpate  the  hated 
order,  and  to  overthrow  the  throne  of  Peter.  We  see  how  the  idea  of  an  absolute  military 
state  rose  powerfully  in  Constantinople  ;  how  it  strove  to  establish  itself  by  brute  force. 
The  Emperor,  according  to  trustworthy  evidence,,  made  the  inhabitants  of  the  city  swear 

N  n  2 


548  CONCILIABULUM   OP   0.  P.     A.D.  754 

that  they  would  henceforth  worship  no  image,  and  give  up  all  intercourse  with  monks. 
Cloisters  were  turned  into  arsenals  and  barracks,  relics  were  hurled  into  the  sea,  and  the 
monks,  as  far  as  possible,  secularized.  And  the  politically  far-seeing  Emperor,  at  the  same 
time  entered  into  correspondence  with  Prance  (Synod  of  Gentilly,  a.d.  767),  and  sought  to 
win  Pepin.  History  seemed  to  have  suffered  a  violent  rupture,  a  new  era  was  dawning  which 
should  supersede  the  history  of  the  Church. 

But  the  Church  was  too  powerful,  and  the  Emperor  was  not  even  master  of  Oriental 
Christendom,  but  only  of  part  of  it.  The  orthodox  Patriarchs  of  the  East  (under  the  rule 
of  Islam)  declared  against  the  iconoclastic  movement,  and  a  Church  without  monks  or  pict- 
ures, in  schism  with  the  other  orthodox  Churches,  was  a  nonentity.  A  spiritual  reformer  was 
wanting.  Thus  the  great  reaction  set  in  after  the  death  of  the  Emperor  (a.d.  775),  the  ablest 
ruler  Constantinople  had  seen  for  a  long  time.  This  is  not  the  place  to  describe  how  it  was 
inaugurated  and  cautiously  carried  out  by  the  skilful  policy  of  the  Empress  Irene  ;  cautiously, 
for  a  generation  had  already  grown  up  that  was  accustomed  to  the  cultus  without  images. 
An  important  part  was  played  by  the  miracles  performed  by  the  re-emerging  relics  and  pict- 
ures. But  the  lower  classes  had  always  been  really  favourable  to  them  ;  only  the  army  and 
the  not  inconsiderable  number  of  bishops  who  were  of  the  school  of  Constantine  had  to  be 
carefully  handled.  Tarasius,  the  new  Patriarch  of  Constantinople  and  a  supporter  of  images, 
succeeded,  after  overcoming  much  difficulty,  and  especially  distrust  in  Rome  and  the  East, 
after  also  removing  the  excited  army,  in  bringing  together  a  General  Council  of  about  350 
bishops  at  Nicsea,  a.d.  787,  which  reversed  the  decrees  of  a.d.  754.  The  proceedings  of  the 
seven  sittings  are  of  great  value,  because  very  important  patristic  passages  have  been  pre- 
served in  them  which  otherwise  would  have  perished ;  for  at  this  synod  also  the  discussions 
turned  chiefly  on  the  Fathers.     The  decision  (opos)  restored  orthodoxy  and  finally  settled  it. 

I  cannot  do  better  than  to  cite  in  conclusion  the  words  of  the  profoundly  learned  Arch- 
bishop of  Dublin,  himself  a  quasi-Iconoclast. 

(Trench.  Led.  Medieval  Ch.  Hist,  p.  93.) 
It  is  only  fair  to  state  that  the  most  zealous  favourers  and  promoters  of  this  ill-directed 
homage  always  disclaimed  with  indignation  the  charge  of  offering  to  the  images  any  rever- 
ence which  did  not  differ  in  kind,  and  not  merely  in  degree,  from  the  worship  which  they 
offered  to  Almighty  God,  designating  it  as  they  did  by  altogether  a  different  name.  We 
shall  very  probably  feel  that  in  these  distinctions  which  they  drew  between  the  one  and  the 
other,  between  the  "honour"  which  they  gave  to  these  icons  and  the  "worship  "  which  they 
withheld  from  these  and  gave  only  to  God,  there  lay  no  slightest  justification  of  that  in  which 
they  allowed  themselves  ;  but  these  distinctions  acquit  them  of  idolatry,  and  it  is  the  merest 

justice  to  remember  this. 

(Trench.     JJt  supra,  p.  99.) 

I  can  close  this  Lecture  with  no  better  or  wiser  words  than  those  with  which  Dean  Mil- 
man  reads  to  us  the  lesson  of  this  mournful  story  :  "  There  was  this  irremediable  weakness 
in  the  cause  of  iconoclasm  ;  it  was  a  mere  negative  doctrine,  a  proscription  of  those  senti- 
ments which  had  full  possession  of  the  popular  mind,  without  any  strong  countervailing  ex- 
citement. The  senses  were  robbed  of  their  habitual  and  cherished  objects  of  devotion,  but 
there  was  no  awakening  of  an  inner  life  of  intense  and  passionate  piety.  The  cold,  naked 
walls  from  whence  the  Scriptural  histories  had  been  effaced,  the  despoiled  shrines,  the  muti- 
lated images,  could  not  compel  the  mind  to  a  more  pure  and  immaterial  conception  of  God 
and  the  Saviour.  Hatred  of  images,  in  the  process  of  the  strife,  might  become,  as  it  did,  a 
fanaticism,  it  could  never  become  a  religion.  Iconoclasm  might  proscribe  idolatry ;  but  it 
had  no  power  of  kindling  a  purer  faith." 


THE   DECEEE    OF    THE    HOLY,    GREAT,    ECUMENICAL    SYNOD,    THE 

SECOND  OF  NICE. 

{Found  in  Labbe  and  Oossart,  Concilia.     Tom.  VII.,  col.  552.) 


The  holy,  great,  and  Ecumenical  Synod 
which  by  the  grace  of  God  and  the  will  of 
the  pious  and  Christ-loving  Emperors,  Con- 
stantine  and  Irene,  his  mother,  was  gathered 
together  for  the  second  time  at  Nice,  the 
illustrious  metropolis  of  Bithynia,  in  the 
holy  church  of  God  which  is  named  So- 
phia, having  followed  the  tradition  of  the 
Catholic  Church,  hath  defined  as  follows : 

Christ  our  Lord,  who  hath  bestowed 
upon  us  the  light  of  the  knowledge  of 
himself,  and  hath  redeemed  us  from  the 
darkness  of  idolatrous  madness,  having 
espoused  to  himself  the  Holy  Catholic 
Church  without  spot  or  defect,  promised 
that  he  would  so  preserve  her :  and  gave 
his  word  to  this  effect  to  his  holy  disciples 
when  he  said  :  "  Lo !  I  am  with  you  always, 
even  unto  the  end  of  the  world,"  which 
promise  he  made,  not  only  to  them,  but  to 
us  also  who  should  believe  in  his  name 
through  their  word.  But  some,  not  con- 
sidering of  this  gift,  and  having  become 
fickle  through  the  temptation  of  the  wily 
enemy,  have  fallen  from  the  right  faith ; 
for,  withdrawing  from  the  traditions  of  the 
Catholic  Church,  they  have  erred  from  the 
truth  and  as  the  proverb  saith  :  "  The  hus- 
bandmen have  gone  astray  in  their  own 
husbandry  and  have  gathered  in  their  hands 
nothingness,"  because  certain  priests, 
priests  in  name  only,  not  in  fact,  had 
dared  to  speak  against  the  God-approved 
ornament  of  the  sacred  monuments,  of 
whom  God  cries  aloud  through  the  prophet, 
"Many  pastors  have  corrupted  my  vine- 
yard, they  have  polluted  my  portion." 

And,  forsooth,  following  profane  men, 
led  astray  by  their  carnal  sense,  they  have 
calumniated  the  Church  of  Christ  our  God, 
which  he  hath  espoused  to  himself,  and 
have  failed  to  distinguish  between  holy  and 
profane,  styling  the  images  of  our  Lord  and 
of  his  Saints  by  the  same  name  as  the 
statues  of  diabolical  idols.  Seeing  which 
things,  our  Lord  God  (not  willing  to  behold 
his  people  corrupted  by  such  manner  of 
plague)  hath  of  his  good  pleasure  called  us 
together,  the  chief  of  his  priests,  from  ev- 
ery quarter,  moved  with  a  divine  zeal  and 


brought  hither  by  the  will  of  our  princes, 
Constantine  and  Irene,  to  the  end  that  the 
traditions  of  the  Catholic  Church  may  re- 
ceive stability  by  our  common  decree. 
Therefore,  with  all  diligence,  making  a 
thorough  examination  and  analysis,  and 
following  the  trend  of  the  truth,  we  di- 
minish nought,  we  add  nought,  but  we  pre- 
serve unchanged  all  things  which  pertain 
to  the  Catholic  Church,  and  following  the 
Six  Ecumenical  Synods,  especially  that 
which  met  in  this  illustrious  metropolis  of 
Nice,  as  also  that  which  Avas  afterwards 
gathered  together  in  the  God-protected 
Royal  City. 

We  believe  .  .  .  life  of  the  world  to 
come.     Amen.1 

We  detest  and  anathematize  Arius  and 
all  the  sharers  of  his  absurd  opinion  ;  also 
Macedonius  and  those  who  following  him 
are  well  styled  "Foes  of  the  Spirit"  (Pneu- 
matomachi).  We  confess  that  our  Lady, 
St.  Mary,  is  properly  and  truly  the  Mother 
of  God,  because  she  was  the  Mother  after 
the  flesh  of  One  Person  of  the  Holy  Trin- 
ity, to  wit,  Christ  our  God,  as  the  Council 
of  Ephesus  has  already  defined  when  it 
cast  out  of  the  Church  the  impious  Nesto- 
rius  with  his  colleagues,  because  he  taught 
that  there  were  two  Persons  [in  Christ]. 
With  the  Fathers  of  this  synod  we  confess 
that  he  who  was  incarnate  of  the  immacu- 
late Mother  of  God  and  Ever- Virgin  Mary 
has  two  natures,  recognizing  him  as  perfect 
God  and  perfect  man,  as  also  the  Council 
of  Chalcedon  hath  promulgated,  expelling 
from  the  divine  Atrium  [a^X?}?]  as  blas- 
phemers, Eutyches  and  Dioscorus ;  and  plac- 
ing in  the  same  category  Severus,  Peter  and 
a  number  of  others,  blaspheming  in  divers 
fashions.  Moreover,  with  these  we  anathe- 
matize the  fables  of  Origen,  Evagrius,  and 

1  Anastasius  in  his  Interpretatio  (Migne,  Pat.  hat.,  Tom. 
CXXIX.,  col.  458),  gives  the  Creed  with  the  words,  "Filioque." 
Cardinal  Julian  in  the  Fifth  Session  of  the  Council  of  Florence 
gave  evidence  that  there  was  then  extant  a  very  ancient  codex 
containing  these  words  ;  and  this  MS. ,  which  was  in  Greek,  was 
actually  shown.  The  Greek  scholar  Gemistius  Pletho  remarked 
that  if  this  were  so,  then  the  Latin  theologians,  like  St.  Thomas 
Aquinas  would  long  ago  have  appealed  to  the  Synod.  (Of.  Hefele, 
Hist.  Councils,  Vol.  V.,  p.  374,  Note  2.)  This  reasoning  is  not 
conclusive  if  Cardinal  Bellarmine  is  to  be  believed,  who  says  that 
St.  Thomas  had  never  seen  the  Acts  of  this  synod.  (De  Imag. 
Sanct.,  Lib.  ii.,  cap.  xxii.) 


550 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


Didymus,  in  accordance  with  the  decision 
of  the  Fifth  Council  held  at  Constantino- 
ple. We  affirm  that  in  Christ  there  be  two 
wills  and  two  operations  according  to  the 
reality  of  each  nature,  as  also  the  Sixth 
Synod,  held  at  Constantinople,  taught,  cast- 
ing out  Sergius,  Honorius,  Cyrus,  Pyrrhus, 
Macarius,  and  those  who  agree  with  them, 
and  all  those  who  are  unwilling  to  be  rev- 
erent. 

To  make  our  confession  short,  we  keep 
unchanged  all  the  ecclesiastical  traditions 
handed  down  to  us,  whether  in  writing  or 
verbally,  one  of  which  is  the  making  of  pic- 
torial representations,  agreeable  to  the  his- 
tory of  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel,  a 
tradition  useful  in  many  respects,  but  espe- 
cially in  this,  that  so  the  incarnation  of  the 
Word  of  God  is  shewn  forth  as  real  and 
not  merely  phantastic,  for  these  have 
mutual  indications  and  without  doubt  have 
also  mutual  significations. 

We,  therefore,  following  the  royal  path- 
way and  the  divinely  inspired  authority  of 
our  Holy  Fathers  and  the  traditions  of  the 
Catholic  Church  (for,  as  we  all  know,  the 
Holy  Spirit  indwells  her),  define  with  all 
certitude  and  accuracy  that  just  as  the  fig- 
ure of  the  precious  and  life-giving  Cross,  so 
also  the  venerable  and  holy  images,  as  well 
in  painting  and  mosaic  as  of  other  fit  ma- 
terials, should  be  set  forth  in  the  holy 
churches  of  God,  and  on  the  sacred  vessels 
and  on  the  vestments  and  on  hangings  and 
in  pictures  both  in  houses  and  by  the  way- 
side, to  wit,  the  figure  of  our  Lord  God  and 
Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  of  our  spotless  Lady, 
the  Mother  of  God,  of  the  honourable  An- 
gels, of  all  Saints  and  of  all  pious  people. 
For  by  so  much  more  frequently  as  they 
are  seen  in  artistic  representation,  by  so 
much  more  readily  are  men  lifted  up  to  the 
memory  of  their  prototypes,  and  to  a  long- 
ing after  them  ;  and  to  these  should  be 
given  due  salutation  and  honourable  rev- 
erence (acnracrixbv  kcCi  rt/u,7)T!,icr)v  irpocTKvvr)- 
aiv),  not  indeed  that  true  worship  of  faith 
(\arpecav)  which  pertains  alone  to  the  di- 
vine nature  ;  but  to  these,  as  to  the  figure 
of  the  precious  and  life-giving  Cross  and 
to  the  Book  of  the  Gospels  and  to  the  other 
holy  objects,  incense  and  lights  may  be  of- 
fered according  to  ancient  pious  custom. 
For  the  honour  which  is  paid  to  the  image 
passes  on  to  that  which  the  image  repre- 
sents, and  he  who  reveres  the  image  reveres 


in  it  the  subject  represented.  For  thus 
the  teaching  of  our  holy  Fathers,  that  is  the 
tradition  of  the  Catholic  Church,  which 
from  one  end  of  the  earth  to  the  other  hath 
received  the  Gospel,  is  strengthened.  Thus 
we  follow  Paul,  who  spake  in  Christ,  and 
the  whole  divine  Apostolic  company  and 
the  holy  Fathers,  holding  fast  the  traditions 
which  we  have  received.  So  we  sing  pro- 
phetically the  triumphal  hymns  of  the 
Church,  "  Rejoice  greatly,  O  daughter  of 
Sion ;  Shout,  O  daughter  of  Jerusalem. 
Rejoice  and  be  glad  with  all  thy  heart. 
The  Lord  hath  taken  away  from  thee  the 
oppression  of  thy  adversaries ;  thou  art 
redeemed  from  the  hand  of  thine  enemies. 
The  Lord  is  a  King  in  the  midst  of  thee ; 
thou  shalt  not  see  evil  any  more,  and  peace 
be  unto  thee  forever." 

Those,  therefore  who  dare  to  think  or 
teach  otherwise,  or  as  wicked  heretics  to 
spurn  the  traditions  of  the  Church  and  to 
invent  some  novelty,  or  else  to  reject  some 
of  those  things  which  the  Church  hath  re- 
ceived (e.g.,  the  Book  of  the  Gospels,  or  the 
image  of  the  cross,  or  the  pictorial  icons,  or 
the  holy  reliques  of  a  martyr),  or  evilly  and 
sharply  to  devise  anything  subversive  of 
the  lawful  traditions  of  the  Catholic  Church 
or  to  turn  to  common  uses  the  sacred  ves- 
sels or  the  venerable  monasteries,1  if  they 
be  Bishops  or  Clerics,  we  command  that 
they  be  deposed ;  if  religious  or  laics,  that 
they  be  cut  off  from  communion. 

[After  all  had  signed,  the  acclamations 
began  (col.  576).] 

The  holy  Synod  cried  out :  So  we  all  be- 
lieve, we  all  are  so  minded,  we  all  give  our 
consent  and  have  signed.  This  is  the  faith 
of  the  Apostles,  this  is  the  faith  of  the  or- 
thodox, this  is  the  faith  which  hath  made 
firm  the  whole  world.  Believing  in  one 
God,  to  be  celebrated  in  Trinity,  we  salute 
the  honourable  images  !  Those  who  do  not 
so  hold,  let  them  be  anathema.  Those  who 
do  not  thus  think,  let  them  be  driven  far 
away  from  the  Church.  For  we  follow  the 
most  ancient  legislation  of  the  Catholic 
Church.  We  keep  the  laws  of  the  Fathers. 
We  anathematize  those  who  add  anything 
to  or  take  anything  away  from  the  Catholic 


1  Constantine  Copronymus  turned  many  monasteries  into  sol- 
diers' barracks.  In  this  tie  has  been  followed  by  other  crowned 
enemies  of  Christ. 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


551 


Church.  We  anathematize  the  introduced 
novelty  of  the  revilers  of  Christians.  We 
salute  the  venerable  images.  We  place 
under  anathema  those  who  do  not  do  this. 
Anathema  to  them  who  presume  to  apply 
to  the  venerable  images  the  things  said  in 
Holy  Scripture  about  idols.  Anathema  to 
those  who  do  not  salute  the  holy  and  ven- 
erable images.    Anathema  to  those   who 


call  the  sacred  images  idols.  Anathema 
to  those  who  say  that  Christians  resort 
to  the  sacred  images  as  to  gods.  An- 
athema to  those  who  say  that  any  other 
delivered  us  from  idols  except  Christ  our 
God.  Anathema  to  those  who  dare  to  say 
that  at  any  time  the  Catholic  Church  re- 
ceived idols. 
Many  years  to  the  Emperors,  etc.,  etc. 


EXCUBSUS    ON    THE    PRESENT    TEACHING    OF    THE    LATIN    AND    GREEK 

CHURCHES  ON  THE  SUBJECT. 


To  set  forth  the  present  teaching  of  the  Latin  Church  upon  the  subject  of  images  and 
the  cultus  which  is  due  them,  I  cite  the  decree  of  the  Council  of  Trent  and  a  passage  from 
the  Catechism  set  forth  by  the  authority  of  the  same  synod. 

{Cone.  Trid,,  Sess.  xxv.     December  3d  and  4th,  1563.     [Buckley's  Trans.]) 

The  holy  synod  enjoins  on  all  bishops,  and  others  sustaining  the  office  and  charge  of 
teaching  that,  according  to  the  usage  of  the  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church  received  from 
the  primitive  times  of  the  Christian  religion,  and  according  to  the  consent  of  the  holy 
Fathers,  and  to  the  decrees  of  sacred  councils,  they  especially  instruct  the  faithful  diligently 
touching  the  intercession  and  invocation  of  saints  ;  the  honour  paid  to  relics  ;  and  the  law- 
ful use  of  images — teaching  them,  that  the  saints,  who  reign  together  with  Christ,  offer  up 
their  own  prayers  to  God  for  men  ;  that  it  is  good  and  useful  suppliantly  to  invoke  them, 
and  to  resort  to  their  prayers,  aid  and  help,  for  obtaining  benefits  from  God,  through  his 
Son,  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord,  who  alone  is  our  Redeemer  and  Saviour  ;  but  that  they  think 
impiously,  who  deny  that  the  saints,  who  enjoy  eternal  happiness  in  heaven,  are  to  be  in- 
voked ;  or  who  assert  either  that  they  do  not  pray  for  men  ;  or,  that  the  invocation  of  them 
to  pray  for  each  of  us,  even  in  particular,  is  idolatry ;  or,  that  it  is  repugnant  to  the  word  of 
God,  and  is  opposed  to  the  honour  of  the  one  mediator  between  God  and  men,  Christ  Jesus, 
or,  that  it  is  foolish  to  supplicate,  orally  or  inwardly,  those  who  reign  in  heaven.  Also,  that 
the  holy  bodies  of  holy  martyrs  and  of  others  now  living  with  Christ,  which  were  the  living 
members  of  Christ,  and  the  temples  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  which  are  by  him  to  be  raised  unto 
eternal  life,  and  to  be  glorified,  are  to  be  venerated  by  the  faithful,  through  which  [bodies] 
many  benefits  are  bestowed  by  God  on  men ;  so  that  they  who  affirm  that  veneration  and 
honour  are  not  due  to  the  relics  of  saints ;  or,  that  these,  and  other  sacred  monuments,  are 
uselessly  honoured  by  the  faithful ;  and  that  the  places  dedicated  to  the  memories  of  the 
Saints  are  vainly  visited  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  their  aid  ;  are  wholly  to  be  condemned, 
as  the  Church  has  already  long  since  condemned,  and  doth  now  also  condemn  them. 

Moreover,  that  the  images  of  Christ,  of  the  Virgin  Mother  of  God  and  of  the  other 
Saints,  are  to  be  had  and  retained  particularly  in  temples,  and  that  due  honour  and  venera- 
tion are  to  be  awarded  them  ;  not  that  any  divinity  or  virtue  is  believed  to  be  in  them,  on 
account  of  which  they  are  to  be  worshipped  ;  or  that  anything  is  to  be  asked  of  them  ;  or 
that  confidence  is  to  be  reposed  in  images,  as  was  of  old  done  by  Gentiles,  who  placed  their 
hope  in  idols  ;  but  because  the  honour  which  is  shown  unto  them  is  referred  to  the  proto- 
types which  they  represent ;  in  such  wise  that  by  the  images  which  we  kiss,  and  before 
which  we  uncover  the  head,  and  prostrate  ourselves,  we  adore  Christ,  and  venerate  the 


552  II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


Saints,  whose  similitude  they  bear.  And  this,  by  the  decrees  of  councils,  and  especially  of 
the  second  synod  of  Nicaea,  has  been  ordained  against  the  opponents  of  images. 

And  the  bishops  shall  carefully  teach  this ;  that,  by  means  of  the  histories  of  the  mys- 
teries of  our  Redemption,  depicted  by  paintings  or  other  representations,  the  people  are 
instructed,  and  strengthened  in  remembering,  and  continually  reflecting  on  the  articles  of 
faith  ;  as  also  that  great  profit  is  derived  from  all  sacred  images,  not  only  because  the  peo- 
ple are  thereby  admonished  of  the  benefits  and  gifts  •which  have  been  bestowed  upon  them 
by  Christ,  but  also  because  the  miracles  of  God  through  the  means  of  the  Saints,  and  their 
salutary  examples,  are  set  before  the  eyes  of  the  faithful ;  that  so,  for  those  things  they  may 
give  God  thanks  ;  may  order  their  own  life  and  manners  in  imitation  of  the  Saints  ;  and  may 
be  excited  to  adore  and  love  God,  and  to  cultivate  piety.  But  if  any  one  shall  teach  or 
think  contrary  to  these  decrees,  let  him  be  anathema.  And  if  any  abuses  have  crept  in 
amongst  these  holy  and  salutary  observances,  the  holy  synod  earnestly  desires  that  they  be 
utterly  abolished  ;  in  such  wise  that  no  images  conducive  to  false  doctrine,  and  furnishing 
occasion  of  dangerous  error  to  the  uneducated,  be  set  up.  And  if  at  times,  when  it  shall  be 
expedient  for  the  unlearned  people,  it  happen  that  the  histories  and  narratives  of  Holy 
Scripture  are  pourtrayed  and  represented  ;  the  people  shall  be  taught,  that  not  thereby  is  the 
Divinity  represented,  as  though  it  could  be  perceived  by  the  eyes  of  the  body,  or  be  depict- 
ured by  colours  or  figures.  Moreover,  in  the  invocation  of  saints,  the  veneration  of  relics, 
and  the  sacred  use  of  images,  every  superstition  shall  be  removed,  all  filthy  lucre  be  abol- 
ished, finally,  all  lasciviousness  be  avoided ;  in  such  wise  that  figures  shall  not  be  painted  or 
adorned  with  a  wantonness  of  beauty  :  nor  shall  men  also  pervert  the  celebration  of  the 
saints,  and  the  visitation  of  relics,  into  revellings  and  drunkenness  ;  as  if  festivals  are  cele- 
brated to  the  honour  of  the  saints  by  luxury  and  wantonness.  Finally,  let  so  great  care  and 
diligence  be  used  by  bishops  touching  these  matters,  as  that  there  appear  nothing  disor- 
derly, or  unbecomingly  or  confusedly  arranged,  nothing  profane,  nothing  indecorous  ;  since 
holiness  becometh  the  house  of  God. 

And  that  these  things  may  be  the  more  faithfully  observed,  the  holy  synod  ordains,  that 
it  be  lawful  for  no  one  to  place,  or  cause  to  be  placed,  any  unusual  image  in  any  place,  or 
church,  howsoever  exempted,  except  it  shall  have  been  approved  of  by  the  bishop  :  also,  that 
no  new  miracles  are  to  be  admitted,  or  new  relics  received,  unless  the  said  bishop  has  taken 
cognizance  and  approved  thereof  ;  who,  as  soon  as  he  has  obtained  some  certain  informa- 
tion in  regard  of  these  matters  shall,  after  having  taken  advice  with  theologians,  and  other 
pious  men,  act  therein  as  he  shall  judge  to  be  agreeable  to  truth  and  piety.  But  if  any 
doubtful,  or  difficult  abuse  is  to  be  extirpated,  or,  in  fine,  if  any  more  serious  question  shall 
arise  touching  these  matters,  the  bishop,  before  he  decides  the  controversy,  shall  await  the 
sentence  of  the  metropolitan  and  of  the  bishops  of  the  same  province,  in  a  provincial  coun- 
cil ;  yet  so,  that  nothing  new,  or  that  has  not  previously  been  usual  in  the  Church,  shall  be 
decreed,  without  the  most  holy  Roman  Pontiff  having  been  first  consulted. 

(Catechism  of  the  Council  of  Trent.1    Pt.  IV.,  Chap.  VI.     [Buckley's  trans.]) 

Question  III. 

God  and  the  Saints  addressed  differently. 

Prom  God  and  from  the  Saints  we  implore  assistance  not  after  the  same  manner :  for 
we  implore  God  to  grant  us  the  blessing  which  we  want,  or  to  deliver  us  from  evils  ;  but  the 
Saints,  because  favourites  with  God,  we  solicit  to  undertake  our  advocacy  with  God,  to  obtain 

1  The  reader  will  remember  that  while  of  great  weight  the  Catechism  was  not  set  forth  by  the  Council,  nor  are  its  statements 
defide  in  the  Latin  Church. 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787  553 


of  liim  for  us  those  things  of  which  we  stand  in  need.     Hence  we  employ  two  different 

forms  of  prayer :  for  to  God,  we  properly  say,  Have  mercy  on  us,  hear  us  ;  to  the  saints, 

Pray  for  us. 

Question  IV. 

In  tvhat  Manner  ive  may  beseech  the  Saints  to  have  mercy  on  us. 

We  may,  however,  also  ask  the  saints  themselves  to  have  mercy  on  us,  for  they  are  most 
merciful ;  but  we  do  so  on  a  different  principle,  for  we  may  beseech  them  that,  touched  with 
the  misery  of  our  condition,  they  would  interpose,  in  our  behalf,  their  favour  and  interces- 
sion with  God.  In  the  performance  of  this  duty,  it  is  most  strictly  incumbent  on  all,  to 
beware  lest  they  transfer  to  any  creature  the  right  which  belongs  exclusively  to  the  Deity  ; 
and  when  we  repeat  before  the  image  of  any  Saint  the  Lord's  Prayer,  our  idea  must  then  be 
to  beg  of  the  Saint  to  pray  with  us,  and  ask  for  us  those  favours  that  are  contained  in  the 
form  of  the  Lord's  Prayer,  to  become,  in  fine,  our  interpreter  and  intercessor  with  God  ; 
for  that  this  is  an  office  which  the  saints  discharge,  St.  John  the  apostle  has  taught  in  the 
Revelation. 

The  doctrine  of  the  Eastern  Church  may  be  seen  from  the  following  from  The  Orthodox 
Confession  of  the  faith  of  the  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church  of  the  East. 

(Confes.  Orthodox.     P.  III.  Q.  LII.  [apud  Kimmel,  Libri  Symbolici  Ecclesice  Orientalis1].) 

Rightly  therefore  do  we  honour  the  Saints  of  God,  as  it  is  written  (Ps.  exxxix.  17) 
"How  dear  are  thy  friends  unto  me,  O  God."  And  divine  assistance  we  ask  for  through 
them,  just  as  God  ordered  the  friends  of  Job  to  go  to  his  faithful  servant,  and  that  he  should 
offer  sacrifice  and  pray  for  them  that  they  might  obtain  remission  of  sin  through  their  pat- 
ronage. And  in  the  second  place  this  [First]  commandment  forbids  men  to  adore  any 
creature  with  the  veneration  of  adoration  (Aarpetas).  For  we  do  not  honour  the  Saints  as 
though  adoring  them,  but  we  call  upon  them  as  our  brothers,  and  as  friends  of  God,  and 
therefore  we  seek  the  divine  assistance  through  these,  our  brethren.  For  they  go  between 
the  Lord  and  us  for  our  advantage.  And  this  in  no  respect  is  opposed  to  this  commandment 
of  the  decalogue. 

Wherefore  just  as  the  Israelites  did  not  sin  when  they  called  upon  Moses  to  mediate  be- 
tween them  and  God,  so  neither  do  we  sin,  when  we  call  for  the  aid  and  intercession  of  the 
Saints. 

(Ibid.    Qusestio  LIV.) 

This  [Second]  Commandment  is  separate  from  the  first.  For  that  treated  of  the  Unity 
of  the  true  God,  forbidding  and  taking  away  the  multitude  of  gods.  But  the  present  treats 
of  external  religious  ceremonies.  For  besides  the  not  honouring  of  false  gods,  we  ought  to 
dedicate  no  carved  likeness  in  their  honour,  nor  to  venerate  with  adoration  such  things,  nor 
to  offer  the  sacrifices  of  adoration  to  them.  Therefore  they  sin  against  this  commandment 
who  venerate  idols  as  gods,  and  offer  sacrifices  to  them,  and  place  their  whole  confidence  and 
hope  in  them  ;  as  also  the  Psalmist  says  (Ps.  exxxv.  15),  "  The  images  of  the  heathen  are  silver 
and  gold,  etc."    They  also  transgress  this  precept  who  are  given  up  to  covetousness,  etc. 

(Ibid.     Qusestio  LV.) 

There  is  a  great  distinction  between  idols  and  images  (twv  d8w\.u>v  ko.1  tu>v  ukovusv).  For 
idols  are  the  figments  and  inventions  of  men,  as  the  Apostle  testifies  when  he  says  (1  Cor. 


1  This  is  not  found  in  Schaffs,  The  Creeds  of  Christendom,  Vol. 
II.,  although  part  of  the  Orthodox  Confession  (viz.  Pt.  I.)  is  re- 
printed.   The  editor  explains  (p.  275)  that  he  has  printed  "the 


doctrinal  part  in  full,"  and  has  omitted  the  rest  because  it  "he- 
longs  to  Ethics  rather  than  Symbolics."  A  somewhat  extraordi- 
nary opinion  to  be  held  by  anyone  who  has  read  the  omitted  parts. 


554  II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


viij.  4),  "We  know  that  an  idol  is  nothing  in  the  world."  But  an  image  is  a  representation 
of  a  true  thing  having  a  real  existence  in  the  world.  Thus,  for  example,  the  image  of  our 
Saviour  Jesus  Christ  and  of  the  holy  Virgin  Mary,  and  of  all  the  Saints.  Moreover,  the 
Pagans  venerated  their  idols  as  gods,  and  offered  to  them  sacrifices,  esteeming  the  gold  and 
silver  to  be  God,  as  did  Nebuchadnezzar. 

But  when  we  honour  and  venerate  the  images,  we  in  no  way  venerate  the  colours  or  the 
wood  of  which  they  are  made  ;  but  we  glorify  with  the  veneration  of  dulia  (SouAetas),  those 
holy  beings  of  which  these  are  the  images,  making  them  by  this  means  present  to  our  minds 
as  if  we  could  see  them  with  our  eyes.  For  this  reason  we  venerate  the  image  of  the  cruci- 
fixion, and  place  before  our  minds  Christ  hung  upon  the  cross  for  our  salvation,  and  to 'such 
like  we  bow  the  head,  and  bend  the  knee  with  thanksgiving.  Likewise  we  venerate  the  image 
of  the  Virgin  Mary,  we  lift  up  our  mind  to  her  the  most  holy  Mother  of  God,  bowing  both 
head  and  knees  before  her  ;  calling  her  blessed  above  all  men  and  women,  with  the  Archangel 
Gabriel.  The  veneration,  moreover,  of  the  holy  images  as  received  in  the  orthodox  Church, 
in  no  respect  transgresses  this  commandment. 

But  this  is  not  one  and  the  same  with  that  we  offer  to  God  ;  nor  do  the  orthodox  give  it 
to  the  art  of  the  painting,  but  to  those  very  Saints  whom  the  images  represent.  The 
Cherubim  which  overshadowed  the  mercy-seat,  representing  the  true  Cherubim  which  stand 
before  God  in  heaven,  the  Israelites  revered  and  honoured  without  any  violation  of  the 
commandment  of  God,  and  likewise  the  children  of  Israel  revered  the  tabernacle  of  witness 
with  a  suitable  honour  (II.  Sam.  vi.  13),  and  yet  in  no  respect  sinned  nor  set  at  naught  this 
precept,  but  rather  the  more  glorified  God.  From  these  considerations  it  is  evident  that  when 
we  honour  the  holy  images,  we  do  not  transgress  the  commandment  of  the  decalogue,  but 
we  most  especially  praise  God,  who  is  "to  be  admired  in  his  Saints"  (Ps.  lxviii.  35).  But 
this  only  we  should  be  careful  of,  that  every  image  has  a  label,  telling  of  what  Saint  it  is, 
that  thus  the  intention  of  him  who  venerates  it  may  be  the  more  easily  fulfilled. 

And  for  the  greater  establishment  of  the  veneration  of  the  holy  images,  the  Church  of 
God  at  the  Seventh  Ecumenical  Synod  anathematized  all  those  who  made  war  against  the 
images,  and  set  forth  the  veneration  of  the  august  images,  and  established  it  forever,  as  is 
evident  from  the  ninth  canon  of  that  synod. 

(Ibid.     Qutestio  LVI.) 

Why  was  he  praised  in  the  Old  Testament  who  broke  down  the  brazen  serpent  (II.  Kgs. 
xviii.  4)  which  long  before  Moses  had  set  up  on  high  ?  Answer :  Because  the  Jews  were 
beginning  an  apostasy  from  the  veneration  of  the  true  God,  venerating  that  serpent  as  the 
true  God ;  and  offering  to  it  incense  as  the  Scripture  saith.  Therefore  wishing  to  cut  off 
this  evil,  lest  it  might  spread  further,  he  broke  up  that  serpent  in  order  that  the  Israelites 
might  have  no  longer  that  incentive  to  idolatry.  But  before  they  honoured  the  serpent  with 
the  veneration  of  adoration,  no  one  was  condemned  in  that  respect  nor  was  the  serpent 
broken. 

But  Christians  in  no  respect  honour  images  as  gods,  neither  in  their  veneration  do  they 
take  anything  from  the  true  adoration  due  to  God.  Nay,  rather  they  are  led  by  the  hand, 
as  it  were,  by  the  image  to  God,  while  under  their  visible  representations  they  honour  the 
Saints  with  the  veneration  of  dulia  (SovXikws)  as  the  friends  of  God  ;  asking  for  their  media- 
tion (/xeo-ireijowiv)  to  the  Lord.  And  if  perchance  some  have  strayed,  from  their  lack  of 
knowledge,  in  their  veneration,  it  were  better  to  teach  such  an  one,  rather  than  that  the  ven- 
eration of  the  august  images  should  be  banished  from  the  Church. 


THE  CANONS   OF  THE  HOLY  AND  ECUMENICAL    SEVENTH 

COUNCIL.1 


CANON  I. 

That  the  sacred  Canons  are  in  all  things  to  be  observed. 

The  pattern  for  those  who  have  received  the  sacerdotal  dignity  is  found  in  the  tes- 
timonies and  instructions  laid  down  in  the  canonical  constitutions,  which  we  receiving 
with  a  glad  mind,  sing  unto  the  Lord  God  in  the  words  of  the  God-inspired  David,  say- 
ing:  "I  have  had  as  great  delight  in  the  way  of  thy  testimonies  as  in  all  manner  of 
riches."  "  Thou  hast  commanded  righteousness  as  thy  testimonies  for  ever."  "  Grant 
me  understanding  and  I  shall  live."  Now  if  the  word  of  prophesy  bids  us  keep  the 
testimonies  of  God  forever  and  to  live  by  them,  it  is  evident  that  they  must  abide  un- 
shaken and  without  change.  Therefore  Moses,  the  prophet  of  God,  speaketh  after  this 
manner :  "  To  them  nothing  is  to  be  added,  and  from  them  nothing  is  to  be  taken 
away."  And  the  divine  Apostle  glorying  in  them  cries  out,  "  which  things  the  angels 
desire  to  look  into,"  and,  "  if  an  angel  preach  to  you  anything  besides  that  which  ye 
have  received,  let  him  be  anathema."  Seeing  these  things  are  so,  being  thus  well-testi- 
fied unto  us,  we  rejoice  over  them  as  he  that  hath  found  great  spoil,  and  press  to  our 
bosom  with  gladness  the  divine  canons,  holding  fast  all  the  precepts  of  the  same,  com- 
plete and  without  change,  whether  they  have  been  set  forth  by  the  holy  trumpets  of  the 
Spirit,  the  renowned  Apostles,  or  by  the  Six  Ecumenical  Councils,  or  by  Councils  locally 
assembled  for  promulgating  the  decrees  of  the  said  Ecumenical  Councils,  or  by  our  holy 
Fathers.  For  all  these,  being  illumined  by  the  same  Spirit,  defined  such  things  as  were 
expedient.  Accordingly  those  whom  they  placed  under  anathema,  we  likewise  anathe- 
matize ;  those  whom  they  deposed,  we  also  depose ;  those  whom  they  excommunicated, 
we  also  excommunicate ;  and  those  whom  they  delivered  over  to  punishment,  we  sub- 
ject to  the  same  penalty.  And  now  "  let  your  conversation  be  without  covetousness," 
crieth  out  Paul  the  divine  Apostle,  who  was  caught  up  into  the  third  heaven  and  heard 
unspeakable  words. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  I. 
We  gladly  embrace  the  Divine  Canons,  viz. : 
those  of the  Holy  Apostles,  of  the  Six  Ecumeni- 
cal Synods,  as  also  of  the  local  synods  and  of  our 
Holy  Fathers,  as  inspired  by  one  and  the  same 
Holy  Spirit.  Wliom  they  anathematize  we  also 
anathematize ;  whom  they  depose,  ive  depose ; 
whom  they  cut  off,  ice  cut  off ;  and  whom  they 
subject  to  penalties,  we  edso  so  subject. 

Haenack  (Hist,  of  Dogma  [Eng.  Trans.],  Vol. 
V.,  p.  327). 
Just  as  at  Trent,  in  addition  to  the  restora- 
tion of  mediaeval  doctrine,  a  series  of  reform- 
ing decrees  was  published,  so  this  Synod 
promulgated  twenty-two  canons  which  can 
be  similarly  described.  The  attack  on  mon- 
achism  and  the  constitution  of  the  Church 
had  been  of  some  use.  They  are  the  best 
canons  drawn  up  by  an  Ecumenical  Synod. 
The  bishops  were  enjoined  to  study,  to  live 


simply,  and  be  unselfish,  and  to  attend  to  the 
cure  of  souls  ;  the  monks  to  observe  order, 
decorum,  and  also  to  be  unselfish.  With  the 
State  and  the  Emperor  no  compromise  was 
made  ;  on  the  contrary,  the  demands  of  Max- 
imus  Confessor  and  John  of  Damascus  are 
heard,  though  in  muffled  tones,  from  the 
canons. 

Van  Espen. 

From  the  wording  of  this  canon  it  is  clearly 
seen  that  by  the  Fathers  of  this  Council  the 
canons  commonly  called  "Apostolical"  are 
attributed  to  the  Apostles  themselves  as  to 
their  true  authors,  conformably  to  the  Trul- 
lan  Synod 2  and  to  the  opinion  then  preva- 
lent among  the  Greeks. 

For  since  the  Fathers  were  well  persuaded 
that  the  discipline  and  doctrine  contained  in 
these  canons  could  be  received  and  confirmed, 
they  cared  but  little  to  enquire  anxiously  who 
were  their  true  authors,  being  content  in  this 


1  This  is  the  caption  as  given  in  the  Greek  of  Bevericlge's  Synod. 


2  But  see  notes  to  canon  of  that  synod. 


556 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  78? 


question  to  follow  and  embrace  the  then  com- 
monly received  opinion,  and  to  ascribe  these 
canons  to  them,  just  as,  the  other  day,  the 
Tridentine  Synod  (Sess.  XXV.,  cap.  j.,  De 
Reform)  calls  these,  without  any  explanation, 
the  "Canons  of  the  Apostles,"  because  then 
as  now  they  were  commonly  called  by  that 
name. 

Beveridge  (Annotat,  p.  166,  at  end  of  Vol. 
II). 
Here  are  recognized  and  confirmed  the 
canons  set  forth  by  the  Six  Ecumenical 
Councils.  And  although  all  agree  that  the 
fifth  and  sixth  Synods  adopted  no  canons, 
unless  that  those  of  the  Council  in  Trullo  be 
attributed   to  them,  yet  when  Tarasius  the 


Patriarch  of  Constantinople  claimed  Canon  82 
of  the  Trullan  Canons  as  having  been  set 
forth  by  the  sixth  synod  (as  is  evident  from 
the  annotations  on  that  canon),  all  the  canons 
of  Trullo  seem  to  be  confirmed  as  having 
issued  from  the  Sixth  Synod.  Or  else,  per- 
chance, as  is  supposed  by  Balsamon  and  Zo- 
naras,  as  also  by  this  present  synod,  the  Trul- 
lan was  held  to  be  Quinisext  {mvBiKTr}),  and 
the  canons  decreed  by  it  to  belong  to  both 
the  fifth  and  the  sixth  council.  Otherwise  I 
do  not  see  what  meaning  these  words  ["  of 
the  Six  Ecumenical  Synods  "]  can  have,  for 
it  will  be  remembered  that  the  reference  is  to 
the  ecclesiastical  canons  of  the  Six  Ecumen- 
ical Synods,  and  not  to  their  dogmatic  de- 
crees. 


CANON  II. 

That  he  who  is  to  be  ordained  a  Bishoj)  must  be  steadfastly  resolved  to  observe  the 
canons,  othenoise  he  shall  not  be  ordained. 

When  we  recite  the  psalter,  we  promise  God :  "  I  will  meditate  upon  thy  statutes, 
and  will  not  forget  thy  words."  It  is  a  salutary  thing  for  all  Christians  to  observe  this, 
but  it  is  especially  incumbent  upon  those  who  have  received  the  sacerdotal  dignity. 
Therefore  we  decree,  that  every  one  who  is  raised  to  the  rank  of  the  episcopate  shall 
knoAV  the  psalter  by  heart,  so  that  from  it  he  may  admonish  and  instruct  all  the  clergy 
who  are  subject  to  him.  And  diligent  examination  shall  be  made  by  the  metropolitan 
whether  he  be  zealously  inclined  to  read  diligently,  and  not  merely  now  and  then,  the 
sacred  canons,  the  holy  Gospel,  and  the  book  of  the  divine  Apostle,  and  all  other 
divine  Scripture ;  and  whether  he  lives  according  to  God's  commandments,  and  also 
teaches  the  same  to  his  people.  For  the  special  treasure  (ovaia)  of  our  high  priesthood 
is  the  oracles  which  have  been  divinely  delivered  to  us,  that  is  the  true  science  of  the 
Divine  Scriptures,  as  says  Dionysius  the  Great.  And  if  his  mind  be  not  set,  and  even 
glad,  so  to  do  and  teach,  let  him  not  be  ordained.  For  says  God  by  the  prophet,  "  Thou 
hast  rejected  knowledge,  I  will  also  reject  thee,  that  thou  shalt  be  no  priest  to  me." 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  II. 


Wlwever  is  to  he  a  bishop  must  know  the  Psal- 
ter by  heart :  he  must  thoroughly  understand 
what  he  reads,  and  not  merely  superficially,  bid 
with  diligent  care,  that  is  to  say  the  Sacred 
Canons,  the  Holy  Oospel,  the  booh  of  the  Apos- 
tle, and  the  whole  of  the  Divine  Scripture.  And 
sliould  he  not  have  such  knoivlcdge,  he  is  not  to 
be  ordained. 

Aristenus. 

Whoso  is  to  be  elevated  to  the  grade  of  the 
episcopate  should  know  .  .  .  the  book  of 
the  Apostle  Paul,  and  the  whole  divine  script- 
ure and  search  out  its  meaning  and  under- 
stand the  things  that  are  written.  For  the 
very  foundation  and  essence  of  the  high 
priesthood  is  the    true    knowledge    of   holy 


Scripture,  according  to  Dionysius  the  Great. 
And  if  he  has  this  knowledge  let  him  be  or- 
dained, but  if  not,  not.  For  God  hath  said 
by  the  prophet :  "  Thou  hast  put  away  from 
thee  knowledge,  therefore  I  have  also  put 
thee  away  from  me,  that  thou  mayest  not  be 
my  priest." 

Fletjrt. 

The  persecution  of  the  Iconoclasts  had 
driven  all  the  best  Christians  into  hiding,  or 
into  far  distant  exile  ;  this  had  made  them 
rustic,  and  had  taken  from  them  their  taste  for 
study.  The  council  therefore  is  forced  to  be 
content  with  a  knowledge  of  only  what  is  ab- 
solutely necessary,  provided  it  was  united 
with  a  willingness  to  learn.  The  examination 
with  which  the  ceremony  of  the  ordination  of 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


557 


bishops  begins  seems  to  be  a  remains  of  this 
discipline. 

Van  Espen. 

The  Synod  teaches  in  this  canon  that  "  all 
Christians "  will  find  it  most  profitable  to 
meditate  upon  God's  justifyings  and  to  keep 
his  words  in  remembrance,  and  especially  is 
this  the  case  with  bishops. 

And  it  should  be  noted  that  formerly  not 
only  the  clergy,  but  also  the  lay  people, 
learned  the  Psalms,  that  is  the  whole  Psalter, 
by  heart,  and  made  a  most  sweet  sound  by 
chanting  them  while  about  their  work. 

But  as  time  went  on,  little  by  little  this 


pious  custom  of  reciting  the  Psalter  and  of 
imposing  its  recitation  and  a  meditation 
thereon  at  certain  intervals,  slipped  away  to 
the  clergy  only  and  to  monks  and  nuns,  as  to 
those  specially  consecrated  to  the  service  of 
God  and  to  meditation  upon  the  divine  words, 
as  Lupus  points  out.  And  from  this  disci- 
pline and  practice  the  appointment  of  the  Ec- 
clesiastical or  Canonical  Office  had  its  rise, 
which  imposes  the  necessity  of  reciting  the 
Psalms  at  certain  intervals  of  time. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decrehim,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
xxxviij,,  C.  vj.,  in  Anastasius's  translation. 


CANON  III. 

That  it  does  not 'pertain  to  princes  to  choose  a  Bishop. 

Let  every  election  of  a  bishop,  presbyter,  or  deacon,  made  by  princes  stand  null, 
according  to  the  canon  which  says :  If  any  bishop  making  use  of  the  secular  powers 
shall  by  their  means  obtain  jurisdiction  over  any  church,  he  shall  be  deposed,  and  also 
excommunicated,  together  with  all  who  remain  in  communion  with  him.  For  he  who  is 
raised  to  the  episcopate  must  be  chosen  by  bishops,  as  was  decreed  by  the  holy  fathers 
of  Nice  in  the  canon  which  says :  It  is  most  fitting  that  a  bishop  be  ordained  by  all  the 
bishops  in  the  province ;  but  if  this  is  difficult  to  arrange,  either  on  account  of  urgent 
necessity,  or  because  of  the  length  of  the  journey,  three  bishops  at  least  having  met  to- 
gether and  given  their  votes,  those  also  who  are  absent  having  signified  their  assent  by 
letters,  the  ordination  shall  take  place.  The  confirmation  of  what  is  thus  done,  shall  in 
each  province  be  given  by  the  metropolitan  thereof. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  III. 
Every  election  made  oy  a  secular  magistrate  is 
null. 

This  is  a  canon  of  a  synod  recognized  by 
East  and  West  as  ecumenical !  The  reader 
can  hardly  resist  the  reflection  that  in  this 
case  there  have  been  and  are  a  great  many  in- 
truding clergymen  in  the  world,  whose  ap- 
pointment to  their  several  offices  is  "  null." 
Van  Espen,  however,  suggests  an  ingenious 
way  out  of  the  difficulty,  which  is  followed 
with  great  approval  by  Hefele. 

Van  Espen. 
Canon  xxix.  of  those  commonly  called  Apos- 


tolic, and  canon  iv.  of  Nice  are  renewed  in  this 
canon. 

From  the  words  of  this  canon  it  is  sufficient- 
ly clear  that  in  this  canon  the  synod  is  treat- 
ing of  the  choice  and  intrusion  of  persons  into 
ecclesiastical  offices  which  the  magistrates  and 
Princes  had  arrogated  to  themselves  under  the 
title  of  Domination  (Dominatio)  ;  and  by  no 
means  of  that  choice  or  rather  nomination 
which  Catholic  princes  and  kings  have  every- 
where and  always  used. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
xciii.,  C.  vij. 


CANON  IV. 

TJiat  Bishops  are  to  abstain  from  all  receiving  of  gifts. 

The  Church's  herald,  Paul  the  divine  Apostle,  laying  down  a  rule  (icavova)  not  only 
for  the  presbyters  of  Ephesus  but  for  the  whole  company  of  the  priesthood,  speaks  thus 
explicitly,  saying,  "I  have  coveted  no  man's  silver  or  gold,  or  apparel.    I  have  shewed 


558 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


you  all  things,  Low  that  so  labouring  ye  ought  to  support  the  weak  ;  "  for  he  accounted 
it  more  blessed  to  give.  Therefore  we  being  taught  by  him  do  decree,  that  under  no 
circumstances,  shall  a  Bishop  for  the  sake  of  filthy  lucre  invent  feigned  excuses  for  sins, 
and  exact  gold  or  silver  or  other  gifts  from  the  bishops,  clergy,  or  monks  who  are  subject 
to  him.  For  says  the  Apostle,  "  The  unrighteous  shall  not  possess  the  kingdom  of  God," 
and,  "  The  children  ought  not  to  lay  up  for  the  parents,  but  the  parents  for  the  children." 
If  then  any  is  found,  who  for  the  sake  of  exacting  gold  or  any  other  gift,  or  who  from 
personal  feeling,  has  suspended  from  the  ministry,  or  even  excommunicated,  any  of  the 
clergy  subject  to  his  jurisdiction,  or  who  has  closed  any  of  the  venerable  temples,  so  that 
the  service  of  God  may  not  be  celebrated  in  it,  pouring  out  his  madness  even  upon  things 
insensible,  and  thus  shewing  himself  to  be  without  understanding,  he  shall  be  subjected 
to  the  same  punishment  he  devised  for  others,  and  his  trouble  shall  return  on  his  own 
head,  as  a  transgressor  of  God's  commandment  and  of  the  apostolic  precepts.  For  Peter 
the  supreme  head  (>;  icepvfyala  atcpoTT)?)  of  the  Apostles  commands,  "  Feed  the  flock  of 
God  which  is  among  you,  taking  the  oversight  thereof,  not  by  constraint,  but  willingly ; 
not  for  filthy  lucre  but  of  a  ready  mind ;  neither  as  being  lords  over  the  clergy  (twv  k\ij- 
pwv  [A.  V.  God's  heritage] ) ;  but  being  ensamples  to  the  flock.  And  when  the  chief 
shepherd  shall  appear,  ye  shall  receive  a  crown  of  glory  that  fadeth  not  away." 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  or  Canon  IV. 


We  decree  that  no  bishop  shall  extort  gold  or 
silver,  or  anything  else  from  bishops,  clerics,  or 
monks  subject  to  his  jurisdiction.  And  if  anyone 
through  the  power  of  gold  or  of  any  other  thing 
or  through  Ms  own  whims,  shall  be  found  to  have 
prevented  any  one  of  the  clergy  who  arc  subject  to 
him,  from  the  celebration  of  the  holy  offices,  or 
shall  have  shut  tip  a  venerable  temple  so  that  the 
sacred  worship  of  God  could  not  be  performed  in 
it,  he  shall  be  subject  to  the  lex  talionis.  For 
Peter  the  Apostle  says :  Feed  the  flock  of  God, 
not  of  necessity  bid  willingly,  and  according  to 
God;  not  for  filthy  lucre's  sake,  but  with  a  prompt 
mind;  not  exercising  lordship  over  the  clergy, 
but  being  an  example  to  the  flock. 

Balsamon. 

Note  the  present  canon,  which  punishes 
those  bishops  by  the  lex  talionis,  who  for  filthy 
lucre's  sake,  or  out  of  private  affection,  sepa- 
rate any  from  themselves,  or  close  temples. 
Wherefore  he  who  cuts  off  others  thus,  let  him 
be  cut  off.  But  he  who  shuts  off  a  temple 
shall  be  punished  even  more  than  by  cutting 
off.  But  lest  any  one  should  say,  by  the  ar- 
gument d  contrario,  that  a  bishop  should  not 


be  punished  who  neither  for  the  sake  of  filthy 
lucre  nor  out  of  private  spite,  but  lawfully 
cuts  some  off,  or  closes  temples,  I  answer  that 
this  argument  only  holds  good  of  the  cutting 
off.  For  a  bishop  who  for  any  reason,  whether 
just  or  unjust,  shuts  up  a  temple,  should  be 
punished,  so  it  seems  to  me,  as  I  have  said 
above. 

Van  Espen. 
It  would  seem  that  at  that  time  among  the 
Greeks  the  use  of  local  interdict  (interdicti 
loccdis)  was  not  known.  But  very  many  the- 
ologians wish  to  find  a  vestige  of  this  interdict 
in  the  IVth  century,  in  St.  Basil's  epistle  cclxx. 
(otherwise  ccxliv.),  where  the  holy  doctor 
teaches  that  the  person  who  carries  off  by 
force  a  virgin,  and  those  who  are  cognizant 
of  this  wickedness  ought  to  be  smitten  with 
excommunication,  and  that  the  village  or  its 
inhabitants,  to  which  the  ravisher  shall  escajie 
and  where  he  shall  be  kept  in  safety,  shall  be 
shut  out  from  the  prayers. 

This  canon,  or  rather  the  first  part  of  it,  is 
found  in  the  Corpus  Juris  Canonici,  Gratian's 
Decretum,  Pars  II.,  Causa  XVI.,  Q.  I.,  Canon 
lxiv.;  all  the  latter  part  is  represented  by  the 
words  "et  infra." 


CANON  V. 

That  they  who  cast  contumely  upon  clerics  because  they  have  been  ordained  in  the  church 
without  bringing  a  gift  with  them,  are  to  be  punished  with  a  fine. 

It  is  a  sin  unto  death  when  men  incorrigibly  continue  in  their  sin,  but  they  sin  more 
deeply,  who  proudly  lifting  themselves  up  oppose  piety  and  sincerity,  accounting  mam- 
mon of  more  worth  than  obedience  to  God,  and  caring  nothing  for  his  canonical  precepts. 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


559 


The  Lord  God  is  not  found  among  such,  unless,  perchance,  having  been  humbled  by  their 
own  fall,  thej  return  to  a  sober  mind.  It  behoves  them  the  rather  to  turn  to  God  with 
a  contrite  heart  and  to  pray  for  forgiveness  and  pardon  of  so  grave  a  sin,  and  no  longer 
to  boast  in  an  unholy  gift.  For  the  Lord  is  nigh  unto  them  that  are  of  a  contrite  heart. 
"With  regard,  therefore,  to  those  who  pride  themselves  that  because  of  their  benefactions 
of  gold  they  were  ordained  in  the  Church,  and  resting  confidently  in  this  evil  custom  (so 
alien  from  God  and  inconsistent  with  the  whole  priesthood),  with  a  proud  look  and  open 
mouth  vilify  with  abusive  words  those  who  on  account  of  the  strictness  of  their  life  were 
chosen  by  the  Holy  Ghost  and  have  been  ordained  without  any  gift  of  money,  we  decree 
in  the  first  place  that  they  take  the  lowest  place  in  their  order ;  but  if  they  do  not  amend 
let  them  be  subjected  to  a  fine.  But  if  it  appear  that  any  one  has  done  this  [i.e.,  given 
money],  at  any  time  as  a  price  for  ordination,  let  him  be  dealt  with  according  to  the  Apos- 
tolic Canon  which  says :  "  If  a  bishop  has  obtained  possession  of  his  dignity  by  means 
of  money  (the  same  rule  applies  also  to  a  presbyter  or  deacon)  let  him  be  deposed  and 
also  the  one  who  ordained  him,  and  let  him  also  be  altogether  cut  off  from  communion, 
even  as  Simon  Magus  was  by  me  Peter."  To  the  same  effect  is  the  second  canon  of  our 
holy  fathers  of  Chalcedon,  which  says :  If  any  bishop  gives  ordination  in  return  for 
money,  and  puts  up  for  sale  that  which  cannot  be  sold,  and  ordains  for  money  a  bishop 
or  chorepiscopus,  or  presbyter,  or  deacon,  or  any  other  of  those  who  are  reckoned  among 
the  clergy ;  or  who  for  money  shall  appoint  anyone  to  the  office  of  ceconomus,  advocate, 
or  paramonarius ;  or,  in  a  word,  who  hath  done  anything  else  contrary  to  the  canon,  for 
the  sake  of  filthy  lucre — he  who  hath  undertaken  to  do  anything  of  this  sort,  having  been 
convicted,  shall  be  in  danger  of  losing  his  degree.  And  he  who  has  been  ordained  shall 
derive  no  advantage  from  the  ordination  or  promotion  thus  negotiated ;  but  let  him  re- 
main a  stranger  to  the  dignity  and  responsibility  which  he  attained  by  means  of  money. 
And  if  any  one  shall  appear  to  have  acted  as  a  go-between  in  so  shameful  and  godless 
a  traffic,  he  also,  if  he  be  a  cleric,  shall  be  removed  from  his  degree ;  if  he  be  a  layman 
or  a  monk,  let  him  be  excommunicated. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  V. 


It  seems  that  such  as  glory  in  the  fact  that  they 
owe  their  ptosition  to  their  liberality  in  gold  to  the 
Church,  and  who  contemn  those  ivho  ivere  chosen 
because  of  their  virtue  and  were  appointed  with- 
out any  largess,  shoidd  receive  the  lowest  place  in 
their  order.  And  shoidd  they  continue  in  their 
ways,  let  them  be  punished.  But  those  ivho  made 
such  gifts  so  as  to  get  ordinations,  let  such  be 
cast  forth  from  communion,  as  Simon  Magus  ivas 
by  Peter. 


Hefele. 


Zonaras  and  Balsamon  in  earlier  times,  and 
later  Christian  Lupus  and  Van  Espen,  re- 
marked that  the  second  part  of  this  canon 
treats  of  simony,  but  not  the  first.  This  has 
in  view  rather  those  who,  on  account  of  their 
large  expenditure  on  churches  and  the  poor, 
have  been  raised,  without  simony,  to  the 
clerical  estate  as  a  reward  and  recognition  of 
their  beneficence  ;  and  being  proud  of  this, 
now  depreciate  other  clergymen  who  were  un- 
able or  unwilling  to  make  such  foundations 
and  the  like. 


CANON  VI. 

Concerning  the  holding  of  a  local  Synod  at  the  time  appointed. 

Since  there  is  a  canon  which  says,  twice  a  year  in  each  province,  the  canonical 
enquiries  shall  be  made  in  the  gatherings  of  the  bishops ;  but  because  of  the  inconven- 
iences which  those  who  thus  came  together  had  to  undergo  in  travelling,  the  holy  fathers 
of  the  Sixth  Council  decreed  that  once  each  year,  without  regard  to  place  or  excuse 
which  might  be  urged,  a  council  should  be  held  and  the  things  which  are  amiss  cor- 
rected. This  canon  we  now  renew.  And  if  any  prince  be  found  hindering  this  being 
carried  out,  let  bim  be  excommunicated.    But  if  any  of  the  metropolitans  shall  take  no 


560 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


care  that  this  be  clone,  he  being  free  from  constraint  or  fear  or  other  reasonable  excuse, 
let  him  be  subjected  to  the  canonical  penalties.  AVhile  the  council  is  engaged  in  con- 
sidering the  canons  or  matters  which  have  regard  to  the  Gospel,  it  behoves  the  assem- 
bled Bishops,  with  all  attention  and  grave  thought  to  guard  the  divine  and  life-giving 
commandments  of  God,  for  in  keeping  of  them  there  is  great  reward ;  because  our 
lamp  is  the  commandment,  and  our  light  is  the  law,  and  trial  and  discipline  are  the 
way  of  life,  and  the  commandment  of  the  Lord  shining  afar  giveth  light  to  the  eyes. 
It  is  not  permitted  to  a  metropolitan  to  demand  any  of  those  things  which  the  bishops 
bring  with  them,  whether  it  be  a  horse  or  any  other  gift.  If  he  be  convicted  of  doing 
anything  of  this  sort,  he  shall  restore  fourfold. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VI. 
Wlienever  it  is  not  possible  for  a  synod  to 
meet  according  to  the  decree  formulated  long  ago, 
tivice  in  each  year,  at  least  let  it  be  held  once,  as 
seemed  good  to  the  Sixth  Synod.  Should  any 
magistrate  forbid  such  meeting,  let  him  be  cast 
out:  and  a  bishop  who  shall  take  no  pains  to 
assemble  it,  shall  be  subject  to  punishment. 
And  when  the  synod  is  held,  should  it  appear 
that  the  Metropolitan  has  taken  anything  away 
from  any  bishop,  let  him  restore  four-fold. 

Hefele. 
Anastasius  remarks  on  this,  that  this  ordi- 


nance (whether  the  whole  canon  or  only  its 
last  passage  must  remain  undecided)  was  not 
accepted  by  the  Latins.  That  this  canon  did 
not  forbid  the  so-called  Synodicum,  which  the 
metropolitans  had  lawfully  to  receive  from 
the  bishops,  and  the  bishops  from  the  priests, 
is  remarked  by  Van  Espen,  1.  c.  p.  464. 

Compare  with  this  (as  Balsamon  advises) 
the  eighth  canon  of  the  Council  in  Trullo. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Gratian's  Decrctum,  Pars  I.,  Dist. 
XVIII.,  C  vij. 


CANON  VII. 

That  to  churches  consecrated  without  any  deposit  of  the  reliques  of  the  Saints,  the 
defect  should  be  made  good. 

Pafl  the  divine  Apostle  says  :  "  The  sins  of  some  are  open  beforehand,  and  some 
they  follow  after."  These  are  their  primary  sins,  and  other  sins  follow  these.  Accord- 
ingly upon  the  heels  of  the  heresy  of  the  traducers  of  the  Christians,  there  followed 
close  other  ungodliness.  For  as  they  took  out  of  the  churches  the  presence  of  the 
venerable  images,  so  likewise  they  cast  aside  other  customs  which  we  must  now 
revive  and  maintain  in  accordance  with  the  written  and  unwritten  law.  We  decree 
therefore  that  relics  shall  be  placed  with  the  accustomed  service  in  as  many  of  the 
sacred  temples  as  have  been  consecrated  without  the  relics  of  the  Martyrs.  And  if 
any  bishop  from  this  time  forward  is  found  consecrating  a  temple  without  holy  relics, 
he  shall  be  deposed,  as  a  transgressor  of  the  ecclesiastical  traditions. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  op  Canon  VII. 


Let  reliques  of  the  Holy  Martyrs  be  placed  in 
such  churches  as  have  been  consecrated  without 
them,  and  this  with  the  accustomed  prayers. 
But  whoever  shall  consecrate  a  church  withoid 
these  shall  be  deposed  as  a  transgressor  of  the 
traditions  of  the  Church. 

Balsamon. 

But  someone  may  be  surprised  that  ora- 
tories to-day  are    consecrated  without  any 


deposition  of  reliques.  And  they  may  ask 
why  the  Divine  Liturgy  is  not  celebrated  in 
them  by  bishops  and  not  by  priests  only. 
The  answer  is  that  the  suj^eraltars  (avTi/xevaia) 
which  are  made  by  the  bishops  when  a  church 
is  consecrated,  suffice  oratories  in  lieu  of  con- 
secration or  enthronement  when  they  are  sent 
to  them,  on  the  occasion  of  their  dedication 
or  opening.  They  are  called  avrt^ivuia  be- 
cause they  are  in  place  of,  and  are  antitypes 
of  those  many  like  tables  which  furnish  thor- 
oughly the  holy  Lord's  table. 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


561 


On  the  rite  of  consecrating  churches  with 
reliques  see  Cardinal  Bona.  (Be  Ilcbus  Lit., 
Lib.  I.,  cap.  xix.) 

The  Antimensia  are  consecrated  at  the 
same  time  as  the  church  ;  a  full  account  of  the 
ceremony  is  found  in  the  Euchologion 
(Goar's  ed.,  p.  648).  A  piece  of  cloth  is  placed 
on  the  altar  and  blessed,  and  then  subse- 
quently, as  need  requires,  pieces  are  cut  off 
from  it  and  sent  to  the  various  oratories,  etc. 
The  main  outline  of  the  ceremony  of  conse- 
cration is  as  follows. 


J.  M.  Neale.     (Int.  Hist.  East.  CIi.,  p.  187.) 

Eelics  being  pounded  up  with  fragrant 
gum,  oil  is  poured  over  them  by  the  bishop, 
and,  distilling  out  to  the  corporals,  is  sup- 
posed to  convey  to  them  the  mysterious  virt- 
ues of  the  relics  themselves.  The  holy 
Eucharist  must  then  be  celebrated  on  them 
for  seven  days,  after  which  they  are  sent 
forth  as  they  are  wanted. 


CANON  VIII. 

That  Hebrews  ought  not  to  be  received  unless  they  have  been  converted  in  sincerity  of 
heart. 

Since  certain,  erring  in  the  superstitions  of  the  Hebrews,  have  thought  to  mock  at 
Christ  our  God,  and  feigning  to  be  converted  to  the  religion  of  Christ  do  deny  him,  and 
in  private  and  secretly  keep  the  Sabbath  and  observe  other  Jewish  customs,  we  decree 
that  such  persons  be  not  received  to  communion,  nor  to  prayers,  nor  into  the  Church ; 
but  let  them  be  openly  Hebrews  according  to  their  religion,  and  let  them  not  bring  their 
children  to  baptism,  nor  purchase  or  possess  a  slave.  But  if  any  of  them,  out  of  a 
sincere  heart  and  in  faith,  is  converted  and  makes  profession  with  his  whole  heart,  set- 
ting at  naught  their  customs  and  observances,  and  so  that  others  ma}'  be  convinced  and 
converted,  such  an  one  is  to  be  received  and  baptized,  and  his  children  likewise ;  and  let 
them  be  taught  to  take  care  to  hold  aloof  from  the  ordinances  of  the  Hebrews.  But  if 
they  will  not  do  this,  let  them  in  no  wise  be  received. 


NOTES 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  VIII. 
Hebrews  must  not  be  received  unless  they  are 
manifestly  converted  ivith  sincerity  of  heart. 

Hefele. 
The  Greek  commentators  Balsamon  and  Zo- 
naras  understood  the  words  "  nor  to  baptize 


their  children"  to  mean,  "these  seeming 
Christians  may  not  baptize  their  own  chil- 
dren," because  they  only  seem  to  be  Chris- 
tians. But  parents  were  never  allowed  to 
baptize  their  own  children,  and  the  true  sense 
of  the  words  in  question  comes  out  clearly 
from  the  second  half  of  the  canon. 


CANON  IX. 

That  none  of  the  books  containing  the  heresy  of  the  tradxicers  of  the  Christians  are 
to  be  hid. 

All  the  childish  devices  and  mad  ravings  which  have  been  falsely  written  against 
the  venerable  images,  must  be  delivered  up  to  the  Episcopium  of  Constantinople,  that 
they  may  be  locked  away  with  other  heretical  books.  And  if  anyone  is  found  hiding 
such  books,  if  he  be  a  bishop  or  presbyter  or  deacon,  let  him  be  deposed ;  but  if  he  be 
a  monk  or  layman,  let  him  be  anathema. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  IX. 
If  any  one  is  found  to  have  concealed  a  book 
written  against  the  venerable  images,  if  he  is  on 
the  clergy  list  let  him  be  deposed ;  if  a  layman  or 
monk  let  him  be  cut  off. 


VOL    xiv. 


Van  Espen. 

What  here  is  styled  Episcopium  was  the 

palace  of  the  Patriarch.     In  this  palace  were 

the  archives,  and  this  was  called  the  "  Carto- 

phylacium,"  in  which  the  charts  and  episcopal 

o  o 


563 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


laws  were  laid  up.  To  this  there  was  a  pre- 
fect, the  grand  Chartophylax,  one  of  the  princi- 
pal officials  and  of  most  exalted  dignity  of  the 
Church  of  Constantinople,  whose  office  Codi- 
nus  explains  as  follows  :  "  The  Chartophylax 
has  in  his  keeping  all  the  charts  which  per- 
tain to  ecclesiastical  law  (that  is  to  say  the 
letters  in  which  privileges  and  other  rights 
of  the  Church  are  contained)  and  is  the  judge 
of  all  ecclesiastical  causes,  and  presides  over 
marriage  controversies  which  are  taken  cog- 


nizance  of,  and  proceedings  for  dissolution  of 
the  marriage  bond  ;  moreover,  he  is  judge  in 
other  clerical  strifes,  as  the  right  hand  of  the 
Patriarch." 

In  this  Cartophylaceum  or  Archives,  there- 
fore, under  the  faithful  guardianship  of  the 
Chartophylax,  the  fathers  willed  that  the 
writings  of  the  Iconoclasts  should  be  laid  up, 
lest  in  their  perusal  simple  Catholics  might 
be  led  astray. 


CANON  X. 

That  no  cleric  ought  to  leave  his  diocese  and  go  into  another  without  the  knowledge 
of  the  Bishop. 

Since  certain  of  the  clergy,  misinterpreting  the  canonical  constitutions,  leave  their 
own  diocese  and  run  into  other  dioceses,  especially  into  this  God-protected  royal  city, 
and  take  tip  their  abode  with  princes,  celebrating  liturgies  in  their  oratories,  it  is  not 
permitted  to  receive  such  persons  into  any  house  or  church  Avithout  the  license  of  their 
own  Bishop  and  also  that  of  the  Bishop  of  Constantinople.  And  if  any  clerk  shall  do 
this  without  such  license,  and  shall  so  continue,  let  him  be  deposed.  With  regard  to 
those  who  have  done  this  with  the  knowledge  of  the  aforesaid  Bishops,  it  is  not  lawful 
for  them  to  undertake  mundane  and  secular  responsibilities,  since  this  is  forbidden  by 
the  sacred  canons.  And  if  anyone  is  discovered  holding  the  office  of  those  who  are 
called  Meizoteroi ;  let  him  either  lay  it  down,  or  be  deposed  from  the  priesthood.  Let 
him  rather  be  the  instructor  of  the  children  and  others  of  the  household,  reading  to 
them  the  Divine  Scriptures,  for  to  this  end  he  received  the  priesthood. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  X. 


A  clergyman  who  after  leaving  his  own  parish 
has  settled  in  another  far  off  from  his  own  bishop 
and  from  the  bishop  of  Constantinople,  shall  be 
received  neither  into  house  nor  church.  And  if 
he  sliall  persevere  in  his  course,  he  shall  be  de- 
posed. But  if  they  shall  do  this  with  a  hnowledge 
of  what  we  have  said,  they  shall  not  receive  a 
secular  position;  or  should  they  have  received 
them,  they  shall  cease  from  them.  And  if  they 
refuse  they  shall  be  deposed. 


Hefele. 


On  the  office  of  the  /m^d-repot,  the  Greek 
commentators  Zonaras  and  Balsamon  give  us 
more  exact  information.  We  give  the  sub- 
stance of  it,  viz.:  they  were  majores  domus 
stewards  of  the  estates  of  high  personages. 

Balsamon. 
On  account  of  this  canon  it  seems  to  me 
that  the  most  holy  Patriarch  at  the  time  and 
his  Chartophylax  allow  alien  clergymen  to 
celebrate  the  liturgy  in  this  royal  city,  even 
without  letters  dimissory  of  the  local  bishop 
of  each  one. 


CANON  XI. 

That  (Eeonomi  ought  to  be  in  the  Episcopal  palaces  and  in  the  Monasteries. 

Since  we  are  under  obligation  to  guard  all  the  divine  canons,  we  ought  by  all  means 
to  maintain  in  its  integrity  that  one  which  says  ceconomi  are  to  be  in  each  church.  If 
the  metropolitan  appoints  in  his  Church  an  oeconomus,  he  does  well ;  but  if  he  does  not, 
it  is  permitted  to  the  Bishop  of  Constantinople  by  his  own  (t'Sra?)  authority  to  choose 
an  ceconomus  for  the  Church  of  the  Metropolitan.    A  like  authority  belongs  to  the 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


5G3 


metropolitans,  if  the  Bishops  who  are  subject  to  them  do  not  wish  to  appoint  ceconomi 
in  their  churches.     The  same  rule  is  also  to  be  observed  with  respect  to  monasteries, 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XI. 


If  the  Metropolitan  does  not  elect  an  (econo- 
mics of  the  metropolis,  the  patriarch  shall  do  so. 
If  the  bishop  shall  not  do  so,  the  Metropolitan 
shall ;  for  so  it  seemed  good  to  the  fathers  assem- 
bled at  Chalcedon.  The  same  law  shall  hold  in 
monasteries. 

Hefele. 

The  Synod  of  Chalcedon  required  the  ap- 
pointment of  special  ceconomi  only  for  all 
bishops'  churches  ;  but  our  synod  extended 
this  prescription  also  to  monasteries. 

Van  Espen. 

Bishops  at  their  ordination  among  other 
things  promise  that  they  will  observe  the 
canons,  and  the  bishops  of  the  Synod  say  that 


among  these  canons  they  are  bound  to  keep 
the  one  that  orders  them  to  appoint  an  (Econo- 
mus. 

Among  the  officials  of  the  Constantiuopoli- 
tan  Church,  Codinus  names  first  The  Grand 
(Eeononius,  "  who "  (he  says)  "  holds  in  his 
own  power  all  the  faculties  of  the  Church,  and 
all  their  returns  ;  and  is  the  dispenser  in  this 
matter  as  well  to  the  Patriarch  as  to  the 
Church," 

Balsamon  and  Aristenus  refer  to  Canon 
xxvj.  of  Chalcedon  ;  and  point  out  how  here 
the  power  of  Constantinople  was  added  to. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canontci,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars,  II. ,  Causa 
IX.,  Quajst,  III.,  Canon  iij. 


CANON  XII. 

That  a  Bishoj)  or  Hegumenos  ought  not  to  alienate  any  part  of  the  suburban  estate 
of  the  church. 

If  a  bishop  or  hegumenos  is  found  alienating  any  part  of  the  farm  lands  of  the 
bishoprick  or  monastery  into  the  hands  of  secular  princes,  or  surrendering  them  to  any 
other  person,  such  act  is  null  according  to  the  canon  of  the  holy  Apostles,  which  says : 
"Let  the  bishop  take  care  of  all  the  Church's  goods,  and  let  him  administer  the  same 
according  as  in  the  sight  of  God."  It  is  not  lawful  for  him  to  appropriate  any  part  him- 
self, or  to  confer  upon  his  relations  the  things  which  belong  to  God.  If  they  are  poor 
let  them  be  helped  among  the  poor ;  but  let  them  not  be  used  as  a  pretext  for  smug- 
gling away  the  Church's  property.  And  if  it  be  urged  that  the  land  is  only  a  loss  and 
yields  no  profit,  the  place  is  not  on  that  account  to  be  given  to  the  secular  rulers,  who 
are  in  the  neighbourhood ;  but  let  it  be  given  to  clergymen  or  husbandmen.  And  if 
they  have  resorted  to  dishonest  craft,  so  that  the  ruler  has  bought  the  land  from  the 
husbandman  or  cleric,  such  transaction  shall  likewise  be  null,  and  the  land  shall  be 
restored  to  the  bishoprick  or  monastery.  And  the  bishop  or  hegumenos  doing  this 
shall  be  turned  out,  the  bishop  from  his  bishoprick  and  the  hegumenos  from  his  monas- 
tery, as  those  who  wasted  what  they  did  not  gather. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XII. 
According  to  tohat  seemed  good  to  the  Holy 
Apostles,  any  act  of  alienation  of  the  goods  of  a 
diocese  or  of  a  monastery  made  by  the  bishop,  or 
by  the  superior  of  the  monastery,  shall  be  null. 
And  the  Bishop  or  Superior  who  shall  have  done 
this  shall  be  expelled. 

Van  Espen. 
As  at  the  time  of  this  Synod  by  the  favour 
of  kings  and  princes  the  way  was  frequently 


open  to  ecclesiastical  dignities,  clergymen 
might  easily  be  induced  through  ambition  to 
make  over  to  princes  some  part  of  the 
Church's  possessions,  if  only  by  so  doing  they 
might  arrive  at  the  coveted  preferment 
through  their  patronage,  and  then  desiring  to 
make  good  this  simoniacal  promise,  they 
studied  to  transfer  the  church's  goods  to 
their  patrons  ;  with  regard  to  these  the  pres- 
ent decree  of  the  synod  was  made. 
But  because  human  ambition  is  cunning, 


002 


564 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


and  solicitously  seeks  a  way  of  attaining  its 
ends,  ambitious  clerics  tried  by  various  colour- 
ing to  give  a  tone  to  and  to  palliate  these 
translations  of  church-goods  to  princes  and 
magistrates,  so  that  they  might  attain  to 
that  they  aimed  at  by  the  favour  of  said 
princes  and  magistrates. 


Two  such  pretexts  the  synod  exposes  and 
rejects  in  the  present  canon. 


This  canon  is  found  in  the 
Canonici,  Pars  II.,  Causa  XII. 
canon  xix. 


Corpus  Juris 
Qusest.  II., 


CANON  XIII. 


That  they  are  loorthy  of  special  condemnation  who  turn  the  monasteries  into  public 
houses. 

Duking  the  calamity  which  was  brought  to  pass  in  the  Churches,  because  of  our  sins, 
some  of  the  sacred  houses,  for  example,  bishops'  palaces  and  monasteries,  were  seized 
by  certain  men  and  became  public  inns.  If  those  who  now  hold  them  choose  to  give 
them  back,  so  that  they  may  be  restored  to  their  original  use,  well  and  good ;  but  if 
not,  and  these  persons  are  on  the  sacerdotal  list,  we  command  that  they  be  deposed ; 
if  they  be  monks  or  laymen,  that  they  be  excommunicated,  as  those  who  have  been 
condemned  from  the  Father,  and  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  assigned  their 
place  where  the  worm  dieth  not  and  the  fire  is  not  quenched,  because  they  set  them- 
selves against  the  voice  of  the  Lord,  which  says :  "  Make  not  my  Father's  house  an 
house  of  merchandise," 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XIII. 
Those  who  make  common  diocesan  or  monastic 
goods,  unless  they  restore  to  the  bishop  or  siqie- 
rior  the  things  belonging  to  the  diocese  or  monas- 
tery, the  ivhole  proceeding  shall  be  null.  If  they 
are  persons  in  Holy  Orders  they  shall  be  deposed, 
but  if  laymen  or  monks  they  shall  be  cast  oat. 

Van  Espen. 
No  doubt  by  "  the  calamity "  here  is 
intended  a  reference  to  the  troubles  occa- 
sioned by  the  Iconoclasts,  during  whose  time 
of  domination  many  nefarious  things  were 
perpetrated  against  the  orthodox,  and  most 
bitter  of  all  was  the  persecution  of  the  monks 
and  priests  by  Leo  the  Isaurian  and  by  his 
son  Constantine  Copronymus,  both  of  them 
supporters  of  the  Iconoclasts. 


And  so  it  came  to  pass  that  by  this  perse- 
cution and  through  the  nefarious  vexations  of 
the  Iconoclasts,  many  monks  and  clerics  fled 
from  their  monasteries  and  left  vacant  the 
Episcopia  or  holy  houses,  and  so  it  became 
easy  for  people  to  come  in  and  occupy  the 
empty  monasteries  and  religious  houses,  and 
to  turn  them  to  common  and  profane  uses, 
especially  when  the  anger  of  the  Emperors 
and  of  the  Iconoclasts  was  known  to  be 
fierce  against  the  monks,  and  such  bishops 
and  priests  as  were  worshippers  of  images. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Pars.  II.,  Causa  xix.,  Qua}st.  III., 
canon  v.,  in  Anastasius's  version  but  lacking 
the  opening  words  which  are  supplied  by  the 
Roman  Correctors. 


CANON  XIV. 

That  no  one  without  ordination  ought  to  read  in  the  ambo  during  the  synaxis. 

That  there  is  a  certain  order  established  in  the  priesthood  is  very  evident  to  all, 
and  to  guard  diligently  the  promotions  of  the  priesthood  is  well  pleasing  to  God. 
Since  therefore  we  see  certain  youths  who  have  received  the  clerical  tonsure,  but  who 
have  not  yet  received  ordination  from  the  bishop,  reading  in  the  ambo  during  the 
Synaxis,  and  in  doing  this  violating  the  canons,  we  forbid  this  to  be  done  (from  hence- 
forth,) and  let  this  prohibition  be  observed  also  amongst  the  monks.  It  is  permitted 
to  each  hegumenos  in  his  own  monastery  to  ordain  a  reader,  if  he  himself  had  received 
the  laying  on  of  hands  by  a  bishop  to  the  dignity  of  hegumenos,  and  is  known  to  be  a 
presbyter.  Chorepiscopi  may  likewise,  according  to  ancient  custom  and  with  the 
bishop's  authorization,  appoint  readers.1 

1  Bev.  adds  in  the  Latin  "  by  imposition  of  hands." 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


565 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XIV. 
ATo  one  shall  read  from  the  ambon  unless  he 
has  been  ordained  by  the  bishop.  And  this  shall 
be  in  force  also  among  monies.  Tlie  superior  of  a 
monastery,  if  he  has  been  ordained  by  the  bishop, 
may  ordain  a  lector  but  only  in  his  own  monas- 
tery.    A  chorcpiscoxms  also  can  make  a  lector. 

Balsamon. 
I  say  therefore  from  this  present  canon  and 
from  canon  xix.  that  they  may  properly  be 
made  superiors,  who  have  never  received  holy 
orders  ;  since  women  may  be  placed  in  such 
positions  in  our  monasteries.  And  as  these 
women  do  not  hear  confessions,  nor  make 
readers,  so  neither  do  superiors  do  this  who 
are  neither  monks  nor  priests,  nor  could  they 
do  this  even  with  the  license  of  the  bishop. 

Hepele. 
Van  Espen  (l.c.  p.  469  sqq.,  and  Jus  Canon., 
t.  i.  pt.  xxxi.  tit.  31,  c.  6),  professes  to  show 


(a)  that  at  that  time  there  was  no  special  bene- 
diction of  abbots  (different  from  their  ordina- 
tion as  priests),  and  that  therefore  the  words, 
"  if  he  (the  superior  of  the  monastery)  him- 
self is  consecrated  by  the  bishop  to  the  office 
of  hegumenus,"  and  "evidently  is  a  priest," 
mean  the  same ;  (b)  that  at  the  time  of  our 
Synod  every  superior  of  a  monastery,  a  prior 
as  well  as  an  abbot,  had  the  power  of  confer- 
ring upon  the  monks  of  his  monastery  the 
order  of  lector  ;  but  (c)  that  the  way  in  which 
Anastasius  translated  the  canon  (si  dumtaxat 
Abbati  manus  impositio  facta  noscatur  ab  cpis- 
copo  secundum  morcm  prceficiendorum  abbatum), 
and  the  reception  of  this  translation  into  the 
Corpus  juris  canonici,  c.L,  Dist.  lxix.,  gave 
occasion  to  concede  the  right  in  question,  of 
ordaining  lectors,  only  to  the  solemnly  con- 
secrated (and  insulated)  abbots. 

This  canon  is  found  (as  just  noted)  in  the 
Corpus  Juris  Canonici,  Pars  I.,  Dist.  LXIX.,  c.  j. 


CANON  XV. 

That  a  clerk  ought  not  to  be  set  over  two  churches. 

From  henceforth  no  clergyman  shall  be  appointed  over  two  churches,  for  this 
savours  of  merchandise  and  filthy  lucre,  and  is  altogether  alien  from  ecclesiastical  cus- 
tom. We  have  heard  by  the  very  voice  of  the  Lord  that,  "  No  man  can  serve  two 
masters,  for  either  he  will  hate  the  one  and  love  the  other,  or  else  he  will  hold  to  the 
one  and  despise  the  other."  Each  one,  therefore,  as  says  the  Apostle,  in  the  calling 
wherein  he  was  called,  in  the  same  he  ought  to  abide,  and  in  one  only  church  to  give 
attendance.  For  in  the  affairs  of  the  Church,  what  is  gained  through  filthy  lucre  is 
altogether  separate  from  God.  To  meet  the  necessities  of  this  life,  there  are  various 
occupations,  by  means  of  which,  if  one  so  desire,  let  him  procure  the  things  needful  for 
the  body.  For  says  the  Apostle,  "  These  hands  have  ministered  unto  my  necessities, 
and  to  them  that  were  Avith  me."  Occupations  of  this  sort  may  be  obtained  in  the  God- 
protected  city.  But  in  the  country  places  outside,  because  of  the  small  number  of  peo- 
ple, let  a  dispensation  be  granted. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XV. 

Hereafter  at  Constantinople  a  cleric  may  not 
serve  two  churches.  But  in  the  outskirts  this 
may  be  permitted  on  account  of  the  scarcity  of 
men. 

Van  Espen. 

This  means  that  in  the  country  or  where 
men  are  so  scarce  that  each  parish  cannot 
have  its  own  presbyter,  one  presbyter  should 
be  allowed  to  serve  two  churches,  not  that  so 
he  may  supply  his  own  need,  (as  to-day  is 
allowed  by  the  combination  of  benefices),  but 
that  so  the  necessities  of  the  parishioners 
may  be  provided  for. 


It  should  be  noted  that  the  synod  deems 
it  "filthy  lucre"  and  "separate  from  God" 
if  ecclesiastical  ministries  are  performed 
"for  the  necessaries  of  life,"  and  is  of  opinion 
that  the  clergy  should  seek  their  support 
from  some  honest  employment  or  work  by 
the  example  of  Paul,  rather  than  to  turn 
ecclesiastical  ministrations  to  the  attaining 
of  temporal  things,  and  to  use  these  as  an 
art  by  which  to  gain  bread. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Pars.  II.,  Causa  XXL,  Qusest.  I., 
canon  j.,  where  the  gloss  is  "because  there 
the  clergy  are  few." 


56  G 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


CANON  XVI. 

That  it  does  not  become  one  in  holy  orders  to  be  clad  in  costly  ajyjarel. 

All  buffoonery  and  decking  of  the  body  ill  becomes  the  priestly  rank.  Therefore 
those  bishops  and  clerics  who  array  themselves  in  gay  and  showy  clothing  ought  to  cor- 
rect themselves,  and  if  they  do  not  amend  they  ought  to  be  subjected  to  punishment.  So 
likewise  they  who  anoint  themselves  with  perfumes.  When  the  root  of  bitterness  sprang 
up,  there  was  poured  into  the  Catholic  Church  the  pollution  of  the  heresy  of  the  traducers 
of  the  Christians.  And  such  as  were  defiled  by  it,  not  only  detested  the  pictured 
images,  but  also  set  at  naught  all  decorum,  being  exceediugly  mad  against  those  avIio 
lived  gravely  and  religiously;  so  that  in  them  was  fulfilled  that  which  is  writteu,  "The 
service  of  God  is  abominable  to  the  sinner."  If  therefore,  any  are  found  deriding  those 
who  are  clad  in  poor  and  grave  raiment,  let  them  be  corrected  by  punishment.  For 
from  early  times  every  man  in  holy  orders  wore  modest  and  grave  clothing ;  and  verily 
whatever  is  worn,  not  so  much  because  of  necessity,  as  for  the  sake  of  outward  show, 
savours  of  dandyism,  as  says  Basil  the  Great.  Nor  did  anyone  array  himself  in  raiment 
embroidered  with  silk,  nor  put  many  coloured  ornaments  on  the  border  of  his  gar- 
ments ;  for  they  had  heard  from  the  lips  of  God  that  "  They  that  wear  soft  clothing  are 
in  kings'  houses." 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XVI. 


Bishops  and  clergymen  arraying  themselves 
in  splendid  clothes  and  anointed  with  perfumes 
must  be  corrected.  Should  they  persist,  they  must 
be  punished. 

Balsamon  and  Zonaras  tell  of  the  magnifi- 
cence in  dress  assumed  by  some  of  the 
superior  clergy  among  the  Iconoclasts,  wear- 
ing stuffs  woven  with  threads  of  gold,  and  their 
loins  girt  with  golden  girdles,  and  sentences 
embroidered  in  gold  on  the  edge  of  their 
raiment.  It  is  curious  to  note  how  often 
heretics  fall  into   extremes.      We  have  seen 


how  Eustathius  wore  a  conspicuous  garb  and 
was  not  willing  to  appear  in  the  ordinary 
dress  of  a  clergyman  of  his  day.  His  was  the 
one  extreme  of  ultra  clerical  or,  I  should  say, 
ascetic  clothing.  These  Iconoclasts  went  to 
the  other  extreme  and  dressed  themselves 
like  men  of  the  world,  giving  themselves  the 
dandy  airs  of  the  fops  of  the  day,  thus,  as 
always,  making  themselves  ridiculous  in  the 
eyes  of  the  wise,  and  their  office  contemptible 
in  the  eyes  of  the  common  people. 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Ganonici,  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars.  II., 
Causa  XXL,  Qucest.  IV.,  canon  j. 


CANON  XVII. 

That  he  shall  not  be  allowed  to  begin  the  building  of  an  oratory,  uho  has  not  the 
means  wherewith  to  finish  it. 

Certain  monks  having  left  their  monasteries  because  they  desired  to  rule,  and,  un- 
willing to  obey,  are  undertaking  to  build  oratories,  but  have  not  the  means  to  finish 
them.  Now  whoever  shall  undertake  to  do  anything  of  this  sort,  let  him  be  forbidden 
by  the  bishop  of  the  place.  But  if  he  have  the  means  wherewith  to  finish,  let  what  he 
has  designed  be  carried  on  to  completion.  The  same  ride  is  to  be  observed  with  regard 
to  laymen  and  clerics. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XVII. 
Wlioever  wishes  to  build  a  monastery,  if  he 
has  the  wherewithal  to  finish  it,  let  him  begin 
the  work,  and  let  him  bring  it  to  a  conclusion. 
But  if  not,  let  him  be  prohibited  by  the  bishop  of 
the  place.  The  same  law  shall  apply  to  laymen 
and  monks. 

Van  Espen  refers  to  Gratian's   Decretum, 


Pars.  III.,  De  Consecrat.,  Dist.  I.,  canon  ix., 
ct  scqg_. 

Balsamon  also  refers  his  readers  to  the 
Fourth  Book  of  the  Basilica,  title  I.,  chapter 
I.,  which  is  part  of  Justinian's  exxiij.  Novel, 
also  to  the  first  canon  of  the  so-called  First- 
and-Second  Council  held  at  Constantinople  in 
the  Church  of  the  Holy  Apostles. 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  78? 


567 


CANON  XVIII. 

That  women  ought  not  to  live  in  bishops'  hotoses,  nor  in  monasteries  of  men. 

"  Be  ye  without  offence  to  those  who  are  without,"  says  the  divine  Apostle.  Now  for 
women  to  live  in  Bishops'  houses  or  in  monasteries  is  ground  for  grave  offence.  Who- 
ever therefore  is  known  to  have  a  female  slave  or  freewoman  in  the  episcopal  palace  or 
in  a  monastery  for  the  discharge  of  some  service,  let  him  be  rebuked.  And  if  he  still 
continue  to  retain  her,  let  him  be  deposed.  If  it  happens  that  women  are  on  the  subur- 
ban estates,  and  the  bishop  or  hegumenos  desires  to  go  thither,  so  long  as  the  bishop 
or  hegumenos  is  present,  let  no  woman  at  that  time  continue  her  work,  but  let  her 
betake  herself  to  some  other  place  until  the  bishop  [or  hegumenos ']  has  departed,  so 
that  there  be  no  occasion  of  complaint. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XVIII. 
It  is  not  fitting  that  women  should  be  kept  in 
episcopal  houses  or  in  monasteries.  If  anyone 
shall  dare  to  do  so,  he  shall  be  reproved  ;  but  if 
he  persists,  he  shall  be  deposed.  No  woman  is 
allowed  to  serve  or  even  to  appear  where  a  bishop 
or  a  superior  of  a  monaster)/  is  present,  but  let 
her  keep  herself  apart  until  he  be  gone. 

Van  Espen. 
Every  woman  the  present  canon  expels 
from  the  Episcopium  or  bishop's  house,  agree- 
ably to  Novel  CXXIII,  chapter  29,  of  the 
Emperor  Justinian,  which,  (although  the 
Nicene  canon  on  the  subject  makes  a  mother, 


sister,  daughter  and  other  persons  free  from 
all  suspicions,  exceptions),  admits  no  excep- 
tions in  the  case  of  a  bishop,  but  saj'S,  "  We 
allow  no  bishop  to  have  any  woman  or  to  live 
with  one." 

For  as  bishops  are  set  in  a  higher  grade 
above  the  rest  of  the  clergy,  and  ought  to  be 
like  lights  set  on  a  candlestick  to  give  light, 
rightly  they  are  ordered  more  than  others  to 
take  care  to  avoid  all  appearance  of  evil,  and 
to  remove  all  from  them  that  might  cause 
suspicion. 

With  regard  to  monks  and  their  houses  see 
Justinian's  Novel  CXXXIII,  Cap.  IV. 


in 


That  the  vovjs  of  those 
without  the  exaction  of  gifts. 


CANON  XIX. 
holy  orders  and  of  monks,  and  of  nuns  are  to  be  made 


The  abomination  of  filthy  lucre  has  made  such  inroads  among  the  rulers  of  the 
churches,  that  certain  of  those  who  call  themselves  religious  men  and  women,  forgetting 
the  commandments  of  the  Lord  have  been  altogether  led  astray,  and  for  the  sake  of 
money  have  received  those  presenting  themselves  for  the  sacerdotal  order  and  the 
monastic  life.  And  hence  the  first  step  of  those  so  received  being  unlawful,  the  whole 
proceeding  is  rendered  null,  as  says  Basil  the  Great.  For  it  is  not  possible  that  God 
should  be  served  by  means  of  mammon.3  If  therefore,  anyone  is  found  doing  anything 
of  this  kind,  if  he  be  a  bishop  or  hegumenos,  or  one  of  the  priesthood,  either  let  him 
cease  to  do  so  any  longer  or  else  let  him  be  deposed,  according  to  the  second  canon  of 
the  Holy  Council  of  Chalcedon.  If  the  offender  be  an  abbess,  let  her  be  sent  away 
from  her  monastery,  and  placed  in  another  in  a  subordinate  position.  In  like  manner 
is  a  hegumenos  to  be  dealt  with,  who  has  not  the  ordination  of  a  presbyter.  With 
regard  to  what  has  been  given  by  parents  as  a  dowry  for  their  children,  or  which  per- 
sons themselves  have  aontributed  out  of  their  own  property,  with  the  declaration  that 
such  gifts  were  made  to  God,  we  have  decreed,  that  whether  the  persons  in  whose  behalf 
the  gifts  were  made,  continue  to  live  in  the  monastery  or  not,  the  gifts  are  to  remain 
with  the  monastery  in  accordance  with  their  first  determination ;  unless  indeed  there 
be  ground  for  complaint  against  the  superior. 


1  Not  found  in  Bev.' 


s  Bev.  "  To  serve  God  and  mammon,'' 


568 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XIX. 


Whoever  for  money  admits  those  coming  to 
Holy  Orders  or  to  the  monastic  life,  if  he  he 
bishop,  or  superior  of  a  monastery  or  any  other 
in  sacred  orders,  shall  either  cease  or  be  deposed. 
And  the  Superior  of  a  monastery  of  women 
shall  be  expelled  [if  she  have  done  so]  and  shall 
be  given  over  to  subjection.  The  same  shall  be 
the  case  ivith  a  superior  of  monks,  if  he  be  not  a 
priest.  But  the  possessions  brought  by  those 
ivho  come  in,  let  them  remain,  whether  the  per- 
sons remain  or  not,  provided  the  superior  be  not 
to  blame. 

Balsamon. 

But  someone  may  aak  how  it  is  that  canon 


V.,  orders  that  he  that  performs  an  ordination 
for  money  is  eo  ipso  to  be  deposed,  whereas 
this  canon  provides  that  he  who  receives  a 
cleric  or  monk  on  account  of  a  pecuniary  gift 
is  to  cease  or  else  to  be  deposed.  The 
answer  is,  that  whenever  anyone  performs 
an  ordination  for  money,  according  to  canon 
V.,  he  is  to  be  deposed  ;  but  when  it  was  only 
a  reception  of  a  person  which  took  place, 
whether  into  the  list  of  the  clergy  or  into 
a  monastery  by  reason  of  money,  who  did 
this  is  only  to  be  deposed,  if  after  being 
denounced  he  persists  in  this  evil.  The 
canons  therefore  are  diverse  in  their  scope. 
The  fifth  treats  of  unlawful  ordination,  but 
this  one  of  improper  receptions. 


CANON  XX. 

That  from  henceforth,  no  double  monastery  shall  be  erected ;  and  concerning  the 
double  monasteries  already  in  existence. 

We  decree  that  from  henceforth,  no  double  monastery  shall  be  erected ;  because  this 
has  become  an  offence  and  cause  of  complaint  to  many.  In  the  case  of  those  persons 
who  with  the  members  of  their  family  propose  to  leave  the  world  and  follow  the  monas- 
tic life,  let  the  men  go  into  a  monastery  for  men,  and  the  women  into  a  monastery  for 
women ;  for  this  is  well-pleasing  to  God.  The  double  monasteries  which  are  already  in 
existence,  shall  observe  the  rule  of  our  holy  Father  Basil,  and  shall  be  ordered  by  his 
precepts,  monks  and  nuns  shall  not  dwell  together  in  the  same  monastery,  for  in  thus 
living  together  adultery  finds  its  occasion.  No  monk  shall  have  access  to  a  nunnery ; 
nor  shall  a  nun  be  permitted  to  enter  a  monastery  for  the  sake  of  conversing  with  any- 
one therein.  No  monk  shall  sleep  in  a  monastery  for  women,  nor  eat  alone  with  a 
nun.1  When  food  is  brought  by  men  to  the  canonesses,  let  the  abbess  accompanied 
by  some  one  of  the  aged  nuns,  receive  it  outside  the  gates  of  the  women's  monastery. 
When  a  monk  desires  to  see  one  of  his  kinswomen,  who  may  be  in  the  nunnery,  let  him 
converse  with  her  in  the  presence  of  the  abbess,  and  that  in  a  very  few  words,  and  then 
let  him  speedily  take  his  departure. 

NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XX, 
Monasteries  shall  not  be  double,  neither  shall 
monks  and  nuns  live  in  the  same  building,  nor 
shall  they  talk  together  apart.  Moreover  if  a 
man  takes  anything  to  a  canoness,  let  him  wait 
ivithout  and  hand  it  to  her,  and  let  him  see  his 
relative  in  the  presence  of  her  superior. 

Van  Espen. 
It  is  evident,  as  Zonaras  remarks,  that  the 
double  monasteries  here  referred  to  are  not 
those  in  which  men  and  women  live  together 
in  one  house,  which  in  this  canon  is  not 
tolerated  at  all,  but  those  which  were  situated 
so  close  together  that  it  was  evident  there 


could  easily  be  an  entrance  from  one  to  the 
other,  these  are  allowed  under  certain  cau- 
tions by  this  canon. 

But  not  only  the  Greeks  but  the  Latins 
also  often  disapproved  of  such  monasteries. 
See  decree  in  Gratian,  Pars.  II.,  Causa  XVIII., 
Q.  II.,  canon  xsviij.,  and  Pope  Paschal's 
letter  (Epis.  X)  to  Didacus,  Abp.  of  Compos- 
tella. 

Despite  all  this  St.  Bridget  of  Sweden 
again  instituted  double  monasteries  in  the 
XVth  century,  concerning  which  Thomas 
Walsingham,  a  monk  of  St.  Alban's  Abbey, 
in  England,  writes  that  in  1414,  King  Henry 
founded  three  monasteries,  of  which  the  third 


1  Bev.    Neither  eball  a  nun  cat  alone. 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


569 


was  a  Brigittine,  professing  the  rule  of  St. 
Augustine,  with  the  additions  called  by  them 
the  Rule  of  the  Saviour.  "  These  two  con- 
vents had  one  church  in  common,  the  nuns 
lived  in  the  upper  part  under  the  roof,  the 
brothers  on  the  ground-floor,  and  each  con- 
vent had  a  separate  inclosure  ;  and  after  pro- 
fession no  one  went  forth,  except  by  special 
licence  of  the  Lord  Pope." 


With  regard  to  the  chaplains  of  nuns,  pro- 
vision is  found  in  Justinian's  Code.  (Lib. 
xliv.,  De  Epis.  ct  clericis.) 

This  canon  is  found  in  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonic'),  Gratian's  Decretum,  Pars.  II.,  Causa 
XVIII.,  Q.  II.,  canon  xxj. 


CANON  XXI. 

That  monies  are  not  to  leave  their  monasteries  and  go  into  others. 

A  monk  or  nun  ought  not  to  leave  the  monastery  to  which  lie  or  she  is  attached, 
and  betake  themselves  to  others.  But  if  one  do  this,  he  ought  to  be  received  as  a  guest. 
It  is  not  however  proper  that  he  be  made  a  member  of  the  monastery,  without  the 
consent  of  his  hegumenos. 


NOTES. 


Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXI. 


It  is  not  allowed  to  a  monk  or  a  nun  to  leave 
her  own  house  and  enter  another  ;  but  if  he  (or 
she)  enters  let  (him  or  her)  be  received  as  a 
guest ;  but  let  him  (or  her)  not  be  admitted  at  all 
nor  given  hospitality  contrary  to  the  ivill  of  the 
superior. 

Aristenus. 

The  present  canon  does  not  allow  a  monk 
or  a  nun  who  goes  to  another  house  to  be 
received  into,  nor  even  to  be  admitted  as  a 
guest,  lest  by  force  of  necessity  he  be  led 
astray  to  worldly  things  and  so  remain. 
Moreover  it  does  not  permit  a  woman  to  be 


admitted  and  received  and  reckoned  in  the 
number  of  the  sisters  without  the  consent  of 
the  superior. 

It  seems  to  me  that  in  Aristenus  an  oIk 
must  have  crept  into  the  text  and  that  the 
first  sentence  should  read  as  now  but  omit- 
ting the  "  not."  This  makes  him  agree  with 
Zonaras  who  says  "  the  man  must  be  received 
as  a  guest,  lest  he  go  to  a  profane  tavern  and 
be  forced  to  associate  Avith  those  who  have 
never  learned  how  to  live  decently."  It  is 
clear  that  the  "  superior  "  referred  to  is  that 
of  the  house  whence  the  monk  or  nun  went 
forth. 


CANON  XXII. 

That  when  it  happens  that  monks  have  to  eat  with  too  men  they  ought  to  observe  giving 
of  thanks,  and  abstemiousness,  and  discretion. 

To  surrender  all  things  to  God,  and  not  to  serve  our  own  wills,  is  great  gain.  For 
says  the  divine  Apostle,  "  whether  ye  eat  or  drink,  do  all  to  the  glory  of  God."  And 
Christ  our  God  has  bidden  us  in  his  Gospels,  to  cut  off  the  beginning  of  sins ;  for  not 
only  is  adultery  rebuked  by  him,  but  even  the  movement  of  the  mind  towards  the  act 
of  adultery  when  he  says,  "  Whosoever  looketh  on  a  woman  to  lust  after  her,  hath  com- 
mitted adultery  with  her  already  in  his  heart."  We  who  have  been  thus  taught  ought 
therefore  to  purify  our  minds.  Now  although  all  things  are  lawful,  all  things  are  not 
expedient,  as  we  have  been  taught  by  the  mouth  of  the  Apostle.  It  is  needful  that  all 
men  should  eat  in  order  that  they  may  live.  And  for  those  to  whom  life  consists  of 
marrying,  and  bringing  forth  children,  and  of  the  condition  of  the  lay  state,  there  is 
nothing  unbecoming  in  men  and  women  eating  together,  only  let  them  give  thanks  to 
the  giver  of  the  food  ;  but  if  there  be  the  entertainments  of  the  theatre,  that  is,  Satanic 
songs  accompanied  with  the  meretricious  inflections  of  harps,  there  come  upon  them, 
through  these  things,  the  curse  of  the  prophet,  who  thus  speaks:  "Woe  to  them  who 
drink  wine  with  harp  and  psaltery,  but  they  regard  not  the  works  of  the  Lord,  and  con- 
sider not  the  works  of  his  hands."     Whenever  persons  of  this  sort  are  found  among 


570  II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


Christians,  let  them  amend  their  ways ;  but  if  they  will  not  do  so,  let  there  overtake 
them  the  penalties  which  have  been  enacted  in  the  canons  by  our  predecessors.  With 
regard  to  those  whose  life  is  free  from  care  and  apart  from  men,  that  is,  those  who  have 
resolved  before  the  Lord  God  to  carry  the  solitary  yoke,  they  should  sit  down  alone 
and  in  silence.  Moreover  it  is  also  altogether  unlawful  for  those  who  have  chosen  the 
priestly  life  to  eat  in  private  with  women,  unless  it  be  with  God-fearing  and  discreet 
men  and  women,  so  that  even  their  feast  may  be  turned  to  spiritual  edification.  The 
same  rule  is  to  be  observed  with  relatives.  Again,  if  it  happen  that  a  monk  or  priest 
while  on  a  journey  does  not  have  with  him  what  is  absolutely  necessary  for  him,  and, 
because  of  his  pressing  needs,  thinks  well  to  turn  aside  into  an  inn  or  into  someone's 
house,  this  he  is  permitted  to  do,  seeing  that  need  compels. 


NOTES 

Ancient  Epitome  of  Canon  XXII. 
There  is  no  objection  to  lagwomen  eating  vjith 


men  :  it  is  not  right  however  for  men  who  have 
chosen  the  lonely  life,  to  eat  privately  with 
women;  unless  jxrehance  together  ivith  them 
that  fear  God  and  with  religious  men  and 
women.     But  ivhcn  travelling,  a  monJc  or  any- 


one in  sacred  orders,  not  carrying  necessary  pro~ 
visions  with  him,  may  enter  a  public  house. 


Balsamon  refers  in  connexion  with  this 
canon  to  Apostolic  Canons  xlij.  and  xliij. ;  lx. 
of  the  Synod  of  Carthage,  and  lxij.  of  the 
Synod  in  Trullo. 


THE  LETTEE  OF  THE  SYNOD  TO  THE  EMPEROR  AND  EMPRESS. 


(Labbe  and  Cossarfc,  Concilia,  Tom.  VII.,  col.  577.) 


To  our  most  religious  'and  most  serene 
princes,  Constantine  and  Irene  his  mother. 
Tarasius,  the  unworthy  bishop  of  your  God- 
protected  royal  city,  new  Rome,  and  all  the 
holy  Council  which  met  at  the  good  pleas- 
ure of  God  and  upon  the  command  of  your 
Christ-loving  majesty  in  the  renowned  me- 
tropolis of  Nice,  the  second  council  to  as- 
semble in  this  city. 

Christ  our  God  (who  is  the  head  of  the 
Church)  was  glorified,  most  noble  princes, 
when  your  heart,  which  he  holds  in  his 
hands,  gave  forth  that  good  word  bidding 
us  to  assemble  in  his  name,  in  order  that 
we  might  strengthen  our  hold  on  the  sure, 
immovable,  and  God-given  truth  contained 
in  the  Church's  dogmas.  As  your  heads 
were  croAvned  with  gold  and  most  brilliant 
stones,  so  likewise  were  your  minds  adorned 
with  the  precepts  of  the  Gospel  and  the 
teachings  of  the  Fathers.  And  being  the 
disciples  and  companions,  as  it  were,  of 
those  whose  sounds  went  forth  into  all  the 
earth,  ye  became  the  leaders  in  the  way  of 
piety  of  all  who  bore  the  name  of  Christ, 
setting  forth  clearly  the  word  of  truth,  and 
giving  a  brilliant  example  of  orthodoxy 
and  piety ;  so  that  ye  were  to  the  faithful 
as  so  many  burning  lamps.  The  Church 
which  was  ready  to  fall,  ye  upheld  with 
your  hands,  strengthening  it  with  sound 
doctrine,  and  bringing  into  the  unity  of  a 
right  judgment  those  who  were  at  variance. 
We  may  therefore  well  say  with  boldness 
that  it  was  through  you  that  the  good 
pleasure  of  God  brought  about  the  triumph 
of  godliness,  and  filled  our  mouth  with  joy 
and  our  tongue  with  gladness.  And  these 
things  our  lips  utter  with  a  formal  decree. 
For  what  is  more  glorious  than  to  maintain 
the  Church's  interests ;  and  what  else  is 
more  calculated  to  provoke  our  gladness  ? 

Certain  men  rose  up,  having  the  form  of 
godliness,  inasmuch  as  they  were  clothed 
with  .the  dignity  of  the  priesthood,  but 
denying  the  power  thereof ;  and  thus  de- 
serving for  themselves  the  charge  of  being 
but  priests  of  Babylon.  Of  such  the  word 
of  prophecy  had  before  declared  that  "  law- 


lessness went  forth  from  the  priests1  of 
Babylon."  Nay  more,  they  banded  them- 
selves together  in  a  sanhedrim,  like  to  that 
which  Caiaphas  held,  and  became  the  prop- 
agators of  ungodly  doctrines.  And  having 
a  mouth  full  of  cursing  and  bitterness,  they 
thought  to  win  the  mastery  by  means  of 
abusive  words.  With  a  slanderous  tongue 
and  a  pen  of  a  like  character,  and  objecting 
to  the  very  terms  used  by  God  himself, 
they  devised  marvellous  tales,  and  then 
proceeded  to  stigmatise  as  idolaters  the 
royal  priesthood  and  the  holy  nation,  even 
those  who  had  put  on  Christ,  and  by  his 
grace  had  been  kept  safe  from  the  folly  of 
idols.  And  having  a  mind  set  upon  evil, 
they  took  in  hand  unlawful  deeds,  thinking 
to  suppress  altogether  the  depicting  of 
the  venerable  images.  Accordingly,  as 
many  icons  as  were  set  in  mosaic  work  they 
dug  out,  and  those  which  were  in  painted 
waxwork,  they  scraped  away ;  thus  turning 
the  comely  beauty  of  the  sacred  temples 
into  complete  disorder.  Among  doings  of 
this  sort,  it  is  to  be  specially  noted  that 
the  pictures  set  up  on  tablets  in  memory  of 
Christ  our  God  and  of  his  Saints,  they  gave 
over  to  the  flames.  Finally,  in  a  word, 
having  desecrated  our  churches,  they  re- 
duced them  to  utter  confusion.  Then  some 
bishops  became  the  leaders  of  this  heresy 
and  where  before  was  peace,  they  fomented 
strife  among  the  people ;  and  instead  of 
wheat  sowed  tares  in  the  Church's  fields. 
They  mingled  wine  with  water,  and  gave 
the  foul  draught  to  those  about  them. 
Although  but  Arabian  wolves,  they  hid 
themselves  under  sheeps'  clothing,  and  by 
specious  reasoning  against  the  truth  sought 
to  commend  their  lie.  But  all  the  while 
"  they  hatched  asps'  eggs  and  wove  a  spi- 
der's web,"  as  says  the  prophet ;  and  "  he 
that  would  eat  of  their  eggs,  having  crushed 
one,  found  it  to  be  addled,  with  a  basilisk 
within  it,"  and  giving  forth  a  deadly 
stench. 

In  such  a  state  of  affairs,  with  a  lie  busy 
destroying  the  truth,  ye,  most  gracious  and 

i  "  Presbyters  "  in  LXX, 


572 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


most  noble  princes,  did  not  idly  allow  so 
grave  a  plague,  and  such  soul-destroying 
error  long  to  continue  in  your  day.  But 
moved  by  the  divine  Spirit  which  abideth 
in  you,  ye  set  yourselves  with  all  your 
strength  utterly  to  exterminate  it,  and  thus 
preserve  the  stability  of  the  Church's  gov- 
ernment, and  likewise  concord  among  your 
subjects ;  so  that  your  whole  empire  might 
be  established  in  peace  agreeably  with  the 
name  [Irene]  you  bear.  Ye  rightly  rea- 
soned, that  it  was  not  to  be  patiently 
endured,  that  while  in  other  matters  we 
could  be  of  one  mind  and  live  in  concord, 
yet  in  what  ought  to  be  the  chief  concern  of 
our  life,  the  peace  of  the  Churches,  there 
was  amongst  us  strife  and  division.  And 
that  too,  when  Christ  being  our  head, 
we  ought  to  be  members  one  of  another, 
and  one  body,  by  our  mutual  agreement 
and  faith.  Accordingly,  ye  commanded 
our  holy  and  numerously-attended  council 
to  assemble  in  the  metropolis  of  Nice,  in 
order  that  after  having  rid  the  Church  of 
division,  we  might  restore  to  unity  the 
separated  members,  and  might  be  careful  to 
rend  and  utterly  destroy  the  coarse  cloak 
of  false  doctrine,  which  they  had  woven  of 
thorn  fibre,  and  unfold  again  the  fair  robe 
of  orthodoxy. 

And  noAv  having  carefully  traced  the 
traditions  of  the  Apostles  and  Fathers,  we 
are  bold  to  speak.  Having  but  one  mind 
by  the  inbreathing  of  the  most  Holy  Spirit, 
and  being  all  knit  together  in  one,  and 
understanding  the  harmonious  tradition  of 
the  Catholic  Church,  we  are  in  perfect  har- 
mony with  the  symphonies  set  forth  by  the 
six,  holy  and  ecumenical  councils;  and 
accordingly  we  have  anathematised  the 
madness  of  Arius,  the  frenzy  of  Macedo- 
nius,  the  senseless  understanding  of  Appoli- 
narius,  the  nian-Avorship  of  Nestorius,  the 
irreverent  mingling  of  the  natures  devised 
by  Eutyches  and  Dioscorus,  and  the  many- 
headed  hydra  which  is  their  companion. 
"We  have  also  anathematised  the  idle  tales 
of  Origen,  Didymus,  and  Evagrius  ;  and  the 
doctrine  of  one  will  held  by  Sergius,  Ho- 
norius,  C_yrus,  and  Pyrrhus,  or  rather,  we 
have  anathematised  their  oavu  evil  will. 
Finally,  taught  by  the  Spirit,  from  Avhom  we 
have  drawn  pure  Avater,  Ave  have  Avith  one 
accord  and  one  soul,  altogether  wiped  out 
with  the  sponge  of  the  divine  dogmas  the 
newly  devised  heresy,  well-worthy  to  be 


classed  with  those  just  mentioned,  Avhich 
springing  up  after  them,  uttered  such  empty 
nonsense  about  the  sacred  icons.  And  the 
contrivers  of  this  vain,  but  revolutionary 
babbling  we  have  cast  forth  far  from  the 
Church's  precincts. 

And  as  the  hands  and  feet  are  moved  in 
accordance  with  the  directions  of  the  mind, 
so  likeAvise,  Ave,  having  received  the  grace 
and  strength  of  the  Spirit,  and  having  also 
the  assistance  and  co-operation  of  your  ro}ral 
authority,  have  with  one  voice  declared  as 
piety  and  proclaimed  as  truth :  that  the 
sacred  icons  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  are 
to  be  had  and  retained,  inasmuch  as  he  Avas 
very  man  ;  also  those  Avhich  set  forth  Avhat 
is  historically  narrated  in  the  Gospels;  and 
those  which  represent  our  undefiled  Ladj', 
the  holy  Mother  of  God;  and  likewise 
those  of  the  Holy  Angels  (for  they  haA'e 
manifested  themselves  in  human  form  to 
those  A\dio  were  counted  worthy  of  the 
vision  of  them),  or  of  any  of  the  Saints. 
[We  have  also  decreed]  that  the  brave 
deeds  of  the  Saints  be  pomtraj^ed  on  tablets 
and  on  the  Avails,  and  upon  the  sacred 
vessels  and  A-estments,  as  hath  been  the 
custom  of  the  holy  Catholic  Church  of  God 
from  ancient  times ;  which  custom  Avas 
regarded  as  having  the  force  of  laAv  in  the 
teaching  both  of  those  holy  leaders  Avho 
lived  in  the  first  ages  of  the  Church,  and  also 
of  their  successors  our  reverend  Fathers. 
[We  have  likeAvise  decreed]  that  these 
images  are  to  be  reverenced  {irpoo-icvveiv), 
that  is,  salutations  are  to  be  offered  to  them. 
The  reason  for  using  the  word  is,  that  it 
has  a  tAvo-fold  signification.  For  Kvvelv  in 
the  old  Greek  tongue  signifies  both  "  to 
salute"  and  "to  kiss."  And  the  preposi- 
tion 7rpo?  giAres  to  it  the  additional  idea  of 
strong  desire  toAvards  the  object ;  as  for 
example,  we  haATe  (fripco  and  trpoa^epw, 
Kupco  and  TrpoaitvpS),  and  so  also  we  have 
Kvveco  and  irpoaKvvea.  Which  last  Avord 
implies  salutation  and  strong  love ;  for 
that  which  one  loves  he  also  reverences 
{irpoa-Kwd)  and  Avhat  he  reverences  that 
he  greatly  loves,  as  the  everyday  custom, 
which  Ave  observe  toAvards  those  we  love, 
bears  witness,  and  in  which  both  ideas  are 
practically  illustrated  when  two  friends 
meet  together.  The  word  is  not  only  made 
use  of  by  us,  but  Ave  also  find  it  set  doAvn  in 
the  Divine  Scriptures  by  the  ancients.  For 
it  is  written  in  the  histories  of  the  Kings, 


II.  NICE.    A.D.  787 


573 


"  And  David  rose  up  and  fell  upon  his  face 
and  did  reverence  to  {irpoaeKvvrjcre)  Jonathan 
three  times  and  kissed  him  "  (1  Kings  xx., 
41).  And  what  is  it  that  the  Lord  in  the 
Gospel  says  concerning  the  Pharisees? 
"  They  love  the  uppermost  rooms  at  feasts 
and  greetings  (acnraaiAovs)  in  the  markets." 
It  is  evident  that  by  "  greetings  "  here,  he 
means  reverence  (irpocricvvricrLv)  for  the 
Pharisees  being  very  high-minded  and 
thinking  themselves  to  be  righteous  were 
eager  to  be  reverenced  by  all,  but  not 
[merely]  to  be  kissed.  For  to  receive  saluta- 
tions of  this  latter  sort  savoured  too  much 
of  lowly  humility,  and  this  was  not  to  the 
Pharisees'  liking.  We  have  also  the  ex- 
ample of  Paul  the  divine  Apostle,  as  Luke 
in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  relates  :  "  When 
we  were  come  to  Jerusalem,  the  brethren 
received  us  gladly,  and  the  day  following 
Paul  went  in  with  us  unto  James,  and  all 
the  presbyters  were  present.  And  when 
he  had  saluted  (a<T7ra<rd/u,evo$)  them,  he 
declared  particularly  what  things  God  had 
wrought  among  the  Gentiles  by  his  minis- 
try "  (Acts  xxi.,  17, 18, 19).  By  the  saluta- 
tion here  mentioned,  the  Apostle  evidently 
intended  to  render  that  reverence  of  honour 
(rt/JLrjTitcrjv  trpoaKvvqdiv)  which  we  shew  to 
one  another,  and  of  which  he  speaks  when 
he  says  concerning  Jacob,  that  "  he  rever- 
enced {Trpoa-eKvvqaev)  the  top  of  his  staff " 
(Heb.  xi.,  21) .  With  these  examples  agrees 
what  Gregory  surnamed  Theologus  says : 
"  Honour  Bethlehem,  and  reverence  {irpoa- 
Kvvriaov)  the  manger." 

Now  who  of  those  rightly  and  sincere- 
ly understanding  the  Divine  Scriptures, 
has  ever  supposed  that  these  examples 
which  we  have  cited  speak  of  the  wor- 
ship in  spirit  (t?}?  iv  irvcvpiari  \arpela<;)  ? 
[Certainly  no  one  has  ever  thought  so] 
except  perhaps  some  persons  utterly  be- 
reft of  sense  and  ignorant  of  all  knowl- 
edge of  the  Scriptures  and  of  the  teach- 
ing of  the  Fathers.  Surely  Jacob  did  not 
adore  (i\drpeuaev)  the  top  of  his  staff ; 
and  surely  Gregory  Theologus  does  not 
bid  us  to  adore  {Karpevetv)  the  manger? 
By  no  means.  Again,  when  offering 
salutations  to  the  life-giving  Gross,  we 
together  sing  :  "  We  reverence  (Trpoo-ievv- 
CijAzv),  thy  cross,  O  Lord,  and  we  also 
reverence  (Trpoo-icvvwfiev)  the  spear  which 
opened  the  life-giving  side  of  thy  good- 
ness."    This  is  clearly  but  a  salutation,  and 


is  so  called,  and  its  character  is  evinced  by 
our  touching  the  things  mentioned  with 
our  lips.  We  grant  that  the  word  irpo- 
aicvvr}cn<i  is  frequently  found  in  the  Divine 
Scriptures  and  in  the  writings  of  our  learned 
and  holy  Fathers  for  the  worship  in  spirit 
(eVt  T775  iv  7rvev/jbari  Aarpe/a?),  since,  being 
a  word  of  many  significations,  it  may  be 
used  to  express  that  kind  of  reverence  which 
is  service.  As  there  is  also  the  veneration 
of  honour,  love  and  fear.  In  this  sense  it 
is,  that  we  venerate  your  glorious  and  most 
noble  majesty.  So  also  there  is  another 
veneration  which  comes  of  fear  alone,  thus 
Jacob  venerated  Esau.  Then  there  is  the 
veneration  of  gratitude,  as  Abraham  rever- 
enced the  sons  of  Heth,  for  the  field  which 
he  received  from  them  for  a  burying  place 
for  Sarah  his  wife.  And  finally,  those 
looking  to  obtain  some  gift,  venerate  those 
who  are  above  them,  as  Jacob  venerated 
Pharaoh.  Therefore  because  this  term  has 
these  many  significations,  the  Divine  Script- 
ures teaching  us,  "Thou  shalt  venerate 
the  Lord  thy  God,  and  him  only  shalt  thou 
serve,"  says  simply  that  veneration  is  to  be 
given  to  God,  but  does  not  add  the  word 
"only;"  for  veneration  being  a  word  of 
wide  meaning  is  an  ambiguous  term ;  but 
it  goes  on  to  say  "  thou  shalt  serve  (Xar- 
pevaeis)  him  only,"  for  to  God  alone  do  we 
render  latria. 

The  things  which  we  have  decreed,  being 
thus  well  supported,  it  is  confessedly  and 
beyond  all  question  acceptable  and  wrell- 
pleasing  before  God,  that  the  images  of 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  as  man,  and  those 
of  the  undefiled  Mother  of  God,  the  ever- 
virgin  Mary,  and  of  the  honourable  Angels 
and  of  all  Saints,  should  be  venerated  and 
saluted.  And  if  anyone  does  not  so  believe, 
but  undertakes  to  debate  the  matter  further 
and  is  evil  affected  with  regard  to  the  vene- 
ration due  the  sacred  images,  such  an  one 
our  holy  ecumenical  council  (fortified  by 
the  inward  working  of  the  Spirit  of  God, 
and  by  the  traditions  of  the  Fathers  and  of 
the  Church)  anathematises.  Now  anathema 
is  nothing  less  than  complete  separation 
from  God.  For  if  any  are  quarrelsome 
:  and  will  not  obediently  accept  what  has 
;  now  been  decreed,  they  but  kick  against 
1  the  pricks,  and  injure  their  OAvn  souls  in 
their  fighting  against  Christ.  And  in  tak- 
ing pleasure  at  the  insults  which  are  offered 
to  the  Church,  they  clearly  shew  themselves 


574 


II.  NICE.    A.D.  787 


to  be  of  those  who  madly  make  war  upon 
piety,  and  are  therefore  to  be  regarded  as 
m  the  same  category  with  the  heretics  of 
old  times,  and  their  companions  and  breth- 
ren in  ungodliness. 

We  have  sent  our  brethren  and  fellow 
priests,  God-beloved  Bishops,  together  with 
certain  of  the  Hegumenoi  and  clergy,  that 
they  may  give  a  full  report  of  our  proceed- 
ings to  your  godly-hearing  ears.  In  proof 
and  confirmation  of  what  we  have  decreed, 
and  also  for  the  assurance  of  your  most 
religious  majesty,  we  have  submitted  proofs 
from  the  Fathers,  a  few  of  the  many  we 
have  gathered  together  in  illustration  of 
the  brightly  shining  truth. 

And  now  may  the  Saviour  of  us  all,  who 
reigns  with  you  (avfifiacrikeiKov  v/j.Iv)  and 
who  was  pleased  to  vouchsafe  his  peace  to 


the  Churches  through  you,  preserve  your 
kingdom  for  many  years,  and  also  your 
council,  princes,  and  faithful  army,  and  the 
whole  estate  of  the  empire ;  and  may  he 
also  give  you  victory  over  all  your  enemies. 
For  he  it  is,  avIio  says:  "As  I  live,  saith 
the  Lord,  they  that  glorify  me,  I  will 
glorify."  He  it  is  also  who  hath  girded 
you  with  strength,  and  will  smite  all  your 
enemies,  and  make  your  people  to  rejoice. 

And  do  thou,  6  city,  the  new  Sion, 
rejoice  and  be  glad ;  thou  that  art  the  won- 
der of  the  whole  world.  For  although 
David  hath  not  reigned  in  thee,  neverthe- 
less thy  pious  princes  here  preside  over 
thy  affairs  as  David  wo  aid  have  done. 
The  Lord  is  in  the  midst  of  thee ;  may  his 
name  be  blessed  forever  and  ever.     Amen. 


EXCURSUS    ON    THE   TWO   LETTERS   OF    GREGORY    II.   TO  THE  EMPEROR 

LEO. 

(J.  B.  Bury,  Appendix  14  to  Vol.  V.  of  his  edition  of  Gibbon's  Borne.    1898.) 

It  is  incorrect  to  say  that  "the  two  epistles  of  Gregory  II.  have  been  preserved  in  the 
Acts  of  the  Nicene  Council"  [as  Gibbon  does].  In  modern  collections  of  the  Acts  of  Ec- 
clesiastical Councils,  they  have  been  printed  at  the  end  of  the  Acts  of  the  Second  Nicene 
Council.  But  they  first  came  to  light  at  the  end  of  the  XVIth.  century  and  were  printed  for 
the  first  time  in  the  Annates  Ecelesiastici  of  Baronius,  who  had  obtained  them  from  Fronton 
le  Due.  This  scholar  had  copied  the  text  from  a  Greek  MS.  at  Rheims.  Since  then  other 
MSS.  have  been  found,  the  earliest  belonging  to  the  Xlth.,  if  not  the  Xth  century. 

In  another  case  we  should  say  that  the  external  evidence  for  the  genuineness  of  the 
epistles  was  good.  We  know  on  the  authority  of  Theophanes  that  Gregory  wrote  one  or 
more  letters  to  Leo  (eVtaroA/rjv  SoyfiariK^v,  sub  a.  m.  6172,  8't  ima-ToXCiv,  sub  a.  m.  6221)  ;  and 
we  should  have  no  external  reasons  to  suspect  copies  dating  from  about  300  years  later. 
But  the  omission  of  these  letters  in  the  Acts  of  the  Nicene  Council,  though  they  are  stated 
to  have  been  read  at  the  council,  introduces  a  shadow  of  suspicion.  If  they  were  preserved, 
how  comes  it  that  they  were  not  preserved  in  the  Acts  of  the  Council,  like  the  letter  of 
Gregory  to  the  Patriarch  Germanus  ?    There  is  no  trace  anywhere  of  the  Latin  originals. 

Turning  to  the  contents,  we  find  enough  to  convert  suspicion  into  a  practical  certainty 
that  the  documents  are  forgeries.  This  is  the  opinion  of  M.  l'abbe  Duchesne  (the  editor 
of  the  Liber  Pontificalis),M.  L.  Guerard  {Melanges  d'Archeologie  ct  d'ffistoirc,  p.  44  s<^.,  1890) ; 
Mr.  Hodgkin  (Italy  and  her  Invaders,  Vol.  vi.,  p.  501  sqq.)  A  false  date  (the  beginning  of 
Leo's  reign  is  placed  in  the  XlVth.  instead  of  the  XVth.  indiction),  and  the  false  implica- 
tion that  the  Imperial  territory  of  the  "  Ducatus  Romre  "  terminated  at  twenty-four  stadia,  or 
three  miles,  from  Rome,  point  to  an  author  who  was  neither  a  contemporary  of  Leo  nor  a 
resident  in  Rome.  But  the  insolent  tone  of  the  letters  is  enough  to  condemn  them.  Greg- 
ory II.  would  never  have  addressed  to  his  sovereign  the  crude  abuse  with  which  these  docu- 
ments teem.  Another  objection  (which  I  have  never  seen  noticed)  is  that  in  the  First  Letter 
the  famous  image  of  Christ  which  was  pulled  down  by  Leo,  is  stated  to  have  been  in  the 
"  Chalkoprateia  "  (bronzesmith's  quarter),  whereas,  according  to  the  trustworthy  sources,  it 
was  above  the  Chalka  gate  of  the  Palace. 

Rejecting  the  letters  on  these  grounds — which  are  supported  by  a  number  of  smaller 
points — we  get  rid  of  the  difficulty  about  a  Lombard  siege  of  Ravenna  before  a.  d.  727  :  a 
siege  which  is  not  mentioned  elsewhere  and  was  doubtless  created  by  the  confused  knowl- 
edge of  the  fabricator. 

EXCURSUS  ON  THE  RECEPTION  OF    THE  SEVENTH  COUNCIL. 

The  reception  of  the  Seventh  Council  in  the  East  was  practically  universal.  No  histo- 
rian pretends  that  the  iconoclastic  opinions  had  any  hold  over  the  masses  of  the  people.  It 
was  strictly  speaking  a  court  movement,  backed  by  the  army,  and  whenever  the  images  were 
laid  low  and  their  veneration  condemned  it  was  by  the  power  of  the  State,  enforcing  its  will 
upon  a  yielding  and  (as  we  would  call  them  to-day)  Erastian  clergy.  (Cf.  Harnack,  History 
of  Dogma,  Eng.  tr.  Vol.  iv.,  p.  32G.) 

The  struggle  indeed  was  not  quite  put  an  end  to  by  the  conciliar  decree.  After  the 
death  of  the  Empress  in  a.  d.  803,  several  iconoclastic  rulers  sat  on  the  throne  of  the  East, 


576 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


among  them  Michael  the  Stammerer,  who  (as  Michaud  wittily  says)  "  fought  the  images  and 
married  the  nuns."1  He  sent  a  letter,  which  is  still  extant,  to  Louis  le  Debonnaire  of  France, 
setting  forth  the  superstitions  of  the  orthodox,  which  is  most  curious  and  interesting  read- 
ing.    ( Vide  Mansi. ) 

His  successor  was  Theophilus,  who  reigned  from  829  until  842,  and  was  a  fanatical  icon- 
oclast. The  Patriarchs  of  Antioch,  Alexandria,  and  Jerusalem  wrote  to  him  officially, 
several  years  after  his  accession,  begging  him  not  to  imitate  the  bad  example  of  the  icono- 
clasts. At  that  time  the  only  Patriarch  who  sided  with  the  heretics  was  John  the  Gramma- 
rian, the  Patriarch  of  Constantinople,  the  very  same  who  in  814  had  repudiated  the  icono- 
clast doctrine  !  With  the  death  of  this  Emperor,  the  power  of  the  Iconoclasts  likewise  died  ; 
and  at  the  accession  of  Michael  III.  with  his  mother  Theodora  and  his  sister  Thecla  came 
the  final  triumph  of  the  images.  I  shall  quote  here  the  words  of  Harnack  :  "  Then  came  an 
Empress,  Theodora,  who  finally  restored  the  worship.  This  took  place  at  the  Synod  held  at 
Constantinople  a.  d.  842.  This  Synod  decreed  that  a  Feast  of  Orthodoxy  (rj  Kvpiam]  t^s  6pSo- 
8o£tas)  should  be  celebrated  annually,  at  which  the  victory  over  the  iconoclasts  should  be 
regularly  remembered.  Thus  the  whole  of  orthodoxy  was  united  in  image-worship.  In  this 
way  the  Eastern  Church  reached  the  position  which  suited  its  nature.  We  have  here  the 
conclusion  of  a  development,  consistent  in  the  main  points.  The  divine  and  sacred,  as  that 
had  descended  into  the  sensuous  world  by  the  incarnation,  had  created  for  itself  in  the 
Church  a  system  of  material,  supernatural  things,  which  offered  themselves  for  man's  use." 
(Hist,  Dogma.    Vol.  iv.,  p.  328.) 

Much  has  been  written,  and  truly  written,  of  the  superiority  of  the  iconoclastic  rulers  ; 
but  when  all  has  been  said  that  can  be,  the  fact  still  remains,  that  they  were  most  of  them 
but  sorry  Christians,  and  the  justice  of  the  Protestant  Archbishop  of  Dublin's  summing  up  of 
the  matter  will  not  be  disputed  by  any  impartial  student.  He  says,  "  No  one  will  deny  that 
with  rarest  exceptions,  all  the  religious  earnestness,  all  which  constituted  the  quickening 
power  of  a  church,  was  ranged  upon  the  other  [i.e.  the  orthodox]  side.  Had  the  Iconoclasts 
triumphed,  when  their  work  showed  itself  at  last  in  its  true  colours,  it  would  have  proved  to 
be  the  triumph,  not  of  faith  in  an  invisible  God,  but  of  frivolous  unbelief  in  an  incarnate 
Saviour."     (Trench.     Mcdiceval  History,  Chap,  vii.) 

We  come  now  to  consider  what  reception  the  Seventh  of  the  General  Councils  met  with 
in  the  West.  And  first  we  find  that  it  was  accepted,  so  far  at  least  as  its  dogmatic  decrees 
went,  by  the  Pope,  the  whole  Roman  Church  and,  so  far  as  we  know,  by  all  the  West  except 
the  realm  of  Charlemagne  and,  as  would  naturally  be  expected,  the  English  Church. 

It  is  true  that  this  was  a  large  and  very  important  exception  ;  so  large  and  so  important 
that  it  becomes  necessary  to  examine  in  detail  the  causes  which  led  to  this  rejection. 

Some  persons  have  supposed  that  the  English  council  held  at  Calcuth  in  787  rejected  the 
ecumenical  character  of  II.  Nice,  because  in  two  of  its  canons  (the  1st  and  the  4th)  it  only 
speaks  of  "the  faith  of  the  Six  General  Councils."  But  it  is  evident  that  the  reason  for  this 
was  that  it  had  not  yet  heard  of  the  Nicene  synod  ;  moreover  such  action  would  have  been 
clearly  impossible,  since  the  council  was  presided  over  by  the  Bishop  of  Ostia,  the  legate  of 
Pope  Hadrian. 

The  first  opposition  to  the  council  in  the  West  was  made  apparently  by  Charlemagne 
himself.     Pope  Hadrian  sent  him  a  translation  of  the  acts  into  Latin  and  signified  his  accept- 


1  It  was  during  this  period  that  St.  Theodore,  writing  in  82G  to 
Arsenius,  observes  : 

'•  Rome  has  not  received  it  as  an  Ecumenical  Council,  but  only 
as  a  provincial  Synod,  assembled  to  remedy  a  particular  evil : 
Legates  of  the  other  Patriarchs  were  not  there ;  those  of  Rome 
had  come  on  different  business :  Legates,  indeed,  there  were 
from  the  East,  but  they  were  brought  by  our  deputies,  not  sent 
by  their  Patriarchs,  who  knew  nothing  of  the  matter  till  after- 


wards. Our  countrymen  acted  thus  for  the  purpose  of  more 
easily  bringing  back  the  heretics  by  persuading  them  that  it  was 
an  Ecumenical  Council."  "Theodore,  however,  it  is  fair  to  add, 
afterwards  changed  his  opinion."  Such  is  Dr.  Neale's  candid  ad- 
mission. Hist  of  the  East.  Ck.,  Vol.  II,  p.  135.  How  often,  alas  ! 
has  this  passage  been  quoted  by  controversialists,  ana  the  word 
of  warning  to  the  reader  been  wholly  omitted. 


ill.  NICE.     A.D.  787  577 


ance  of  the  council.  But  this  translation  was  so  badly  done  that  not  only  was  a  large  part 
of  the  acts  utterly  unintelligible,  but  also,  in  at  least  one  place,  a  bishop  of  the  council  was 
made  to  say  that  the  sacred  images  were  to  be  adored  with  the  same  supreme  worship  as  is 
paid  to  the  Holy  Trinity. 

It  may  not  be  wholly  charitable  to  suggest  the  possibility  of  such  a  thing  having  any 
influence  in  the  matter.  On  the  other  hand  it  would  be  unfair  to  the  reader  not  to  state 
that  Charlemagne  had,  or  thought  that  he  had,  serious  grievances  against  the  Empress 
Irene,  and  that  he  might  not  have  been  sorry  to  have  discovered  some  reason  for  which  to 
reject  her  council.  It  should,  moreover,  be  remembered  how  much  the  Pope  in  his  struggle 
for  independence  of  the  Eastern  Empire  trusted  to  Charlemagne,  and  therefore  how  reluct- 
ant he  might  readily  have  been  to  break  with  so  important  an  ally ;  and  so  might  be  induced 
to  tolerate  the  rejection  by  the  Frankish  Emperor  of  what  had  been  received  by  him,  the 
Vicar  of  Christ  and  the  successor  of  Peter,  as  the  Seventh  Ecumenical  Synod  of  the  Cath- 
olic Church. 

As  a  result  of  this  feeling  of  Charlemagne's,  there  were  written  what  we  call  the  "Caro- 
line Books,"  and  these  exercised  so  mighty  an  influence  on  this  whole  question,  and  so  com- 
pletely misled  even  the  learned,  that  I  shall  give  a  careful  examination  of  their  authorship, 
authority,  and  contents  ;  for  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  it  was  the  influence  of  these  books 
(which  appeared  in  790)  that  induced  the  unfortunate  action  of  the  Council  of  Frankfort 
four  years  later  (in  794)  ;  and  that  of  the  Convention  of  Paris  in  825. 


vol.  xjv.  p  p 


EXAMINATION   OF   THE  CAEOLINE  BOOKS. 

I.  Authorship  of  the  Caroline  Books. 

I  find  that  many  writers  on  the  subject  of  what  they  call  "image  worship,"  speak 
frequently  of  these  "Caroline  Books,"  and  refer  to  them  with  great  admiration.  It  is  also 
absolutely  certain  that  many  of  these  writers  have  never  read,  possibly  never  seen,  the  books 
of  which  they  write  so  eloquently.  I  have  used  the  reprint  of  Melchior  Goldast's  edition 
(Frankfort,  1608)  in  Migne's  Patrologia  Latina,  Tom.  xcviij.,  in  this  article. 

The  work  begins  thus.  "In  the  name  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ  beginneth 
the  work  of  the  most  illustrious  and  glorious  man  Charles,  by  the  will  of  God,  king  of  the 
Franks,  Gauls,  Germany,  etc.,  against  the  Synod  which  in  Greek  parts  firmly  and  proudly 
decreed  in  favour  of  adoring  (adorandis)  images,"  then  follows  immediately  what  is  called 
"  Charlemagne's  Preface." 

Now  of  course  nobody  supposes  for  a  moment  that  Charlemagne  wrote  these  books  him- 
self. But  Sir  William  Palmer  {Treatise  on  the  Church,  Vol.  II.,  p.  204)  says  that  the  prelates 
of  the  realm  of  France  "composed  a  reply  to  this  Synod,"  he  further  says  that  "  This  work 
was  published  by  the  authority  and  in  the  name  of  the  Emperor  Charlemagne  and  with  the 
consent  of  his  bishops,  in  790  "  (p.  205).  I  am  entirely  at  a  loss  to  know  on  what  authority 
these  statements  rest.  The  authorship  of  the  work  has,  not  without  great  show  of  reason, 
been  attributed  to  Alcuin.  Besides  the  English  tradition  that  he  had  written  such  a  book, 
there  has  been  pointed  out  the  remarkable  similarity  of  his  commentary  on  St.  John  (4,  5, 
et  seqq.)  to  a  passage  in  Liber  IV.,  cap.  vj.,  of  these  Caroline  Books.  (On  this  point  see 
Forster,  General  Preface  to  the  Works  of  Alcuin  n.  10.)  But  after  all  whether  Alcuin  was 
the  author  or  no,  matters  little,  the  statement  that  the  "bishops  of  France  "were  in  any 
sense  responsible  for  it  is  entirely  gratuitous,  unless  indeed  some  should  think  it  may  be 
gathered  from  the  statement  of  the  Preface  ; 

"  We  have  undertaken  this  work  with  the  priests  who  are  prelates  of  the  Catholic  flocks 
in  the  kingdom  which  has  been  granted  to  us  of  God."  l  But  this  would  not  be  the  only 
book  written  at  the  command  of,  and  set  forth  by,  a  secular  prince  and  yet  claiming  the 
authority  of  the  Church.  I  need  only  give  as  examples  "  The  Institution  of  a  Christian 
Man  "  and  the  Second  Prayer  Book  of  Edward  the  Vlth. 

II.  Authority  of  the  Caroline  Books. 

But  be  their  authorship  what  it  may,  we  come  next  to  consider  their  authority  ;  and  here 
we  are  met  with  the  greatest  difficulty,  for  it  is  certain  that  despite  the  statements  to  the 
contrary,  these  books  were  not  those  sent  to  Pope  Hadrian  by  Charlemagne,  those  of  which 
the  Pope  deigned  to  write  a  refutation.  This  Hefele  has  clearly  proved,  by  pointing  out 
that  those  sent  to  the  Pope  treated  the  matter  in  an  entirely  different  order ;  that  there 
were  in  those  sent  only  85  chapters,  while  these  books  have  120  (or  121  if  the  authenticity 
of  the  last  chapter  is  granted).  Moreover  the  quotations  made  by  Hadrian  do  not  occur 
verbatim  in  the  Caroline  books,  but  are  in  some  cases  enlarged,  in  others  abbreviated.  (Cf. 
Hefele's  treatment  of  the  whole  subject  in  the  original  German.)  Petavius  thinks  that  what 
Hadrian  received  were  extracts  from  the  Caroline  Books,  made  by  the  Council  of  Frank- 
fort. 

1  It  is  curious  that  Midland  (Sept.  Conciles  (Emininiques.  p.     book  proves  that  no  one  of  them  was  a  bishop."    The  Latin  is 
294)  should  say  "the  title  priest  given  to  those  who  composed  the  I  "  Sacerdotum  Praslatorum  "  ! 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787  579 


Hefele  arrives  at  a  directly  opposite  conclusion,  viz.,  that  the  Caroline  Books  are  an 
expansion  of  the  Capitula  sent  to  the  Pope,  and  that  this  expansion  was  made  at  the  bidding 
of  Charlemagne. 

It  should  be  noted  here  that  Baronius,  Bellarmine,  Binius,  and  Surius  all  question  the 
authenticity  of  the  Caroline  Books  altogether.  (Vide  Baron,  Annal,  a.d.,  794.)  But  this 
extreme  position  seems  to  be  refuted  by  the  fact  that  certain  quotations  made  by  Hinc- 
mar  are  found  in  the  books  as  we  have  them.  (Cf.  Sirmond  in  Mansi,  Tom.  XIII,  905, 
Labbe,  Tom.  VII.,  col.  1054.) 

III.     Contents  of  the  Caroline  Boohs. 

If  the  authorship  and  authority  of  these  books  are  difficult  subjects,  the  contents  of  the 
books  are  still  more  extraordinary,  for  it  seems  to  be  certain,  past  all  possibility  of  doubt, 
that  the  authors  of  these  books  had  never  read  the  acts  nor  decrees  of  the  Seventh  Ecu- 
menical Synod,  of  which  they  were  writing ;  and  further  that  he  or  they  were  also  com- 
pletely ignorant  of  what  took  place  at  the  Conciliabulum  of  754. 

One  example  will  be  sufficient  to  prove  this  point.  In  Book  IV.,  Chapter  XIV.,  and  also 
in  chapter  XX,  (Migne's  ed.,  col.  1213  and  col.  1226),  the  charge  is  made  that  the  Seventh 
Council,  especially  Gregory,  the  bishop  of  Neocsesarea,  unduly  nattered  the  Empress.  Now 
as  a  matter  of  fact  the  remarks  referred  to  were  made  at  the  Conciliabulum  of  754,  and  not 
at  the  Second  Council  of  Nice  ;  they  were  not  made  by  Gregory  of  Neocsesarea  at  all,  and 
the  i*eason  they  are  attributed  to  him  is  because  he  read  them  in  the  proceedings  of  that 
pseudo-council  to  the  true  council  of  787. 

Other  examples  could  easily  be  given,  but  this  is  sufficient.  Ab  uno  disce  omnes.  The 
most  famous  however  of  all  the  ignorant  blunders  found  in  these  books  must  not  here  be 
omitted.  It  occurs  in  Book  III.,  chapter  xvij.,  and  is  no  less  serious  than  to  attribute  to 
Constantius,  the  bishop  of  Cyprus,  the  monstrous  statement  that  the  sacred  images  were  to 
be  given  the  supreme  adoration  due  to  the  Holy  Trinity.  What  a  complete  mistake  this 
was,  we  have  already  pointed  out,  and  will  have  been  evident  to  anyone  who  has  read  the 
extracts  of  the  acts  given  in  the  foregoing  pages.  I  have  said  "mistake  ;"  and  I  have  said 
so  deliberately,  because  I  am  convinced  that  the  Caroline  books,  the  decree  of  Frankfort, 
and  the  decision  of  the  Convention  of  Paris,  all  sprung  from  ignorance  and  blundering ; 
and  largely  through  the  force  of  this  particular  false  statement  on  which  I  am  writing.  But 
I  must  not  omit  the  statement  of  Sir  William  Palmer,  a  champion  of  these  books,  that  "  the 
acts  of  the  synod  of  Nice  having  been  sent  to  Rome  in  the  year  787,  Pope  Hadrian  himself, 
according  to  Hincmar,  transmitted  them  into  France  to  Charlemagne,  to  be  confirmed  by 
the  bishops  of  his  kingdom ;  and  the  Emperor  [i.e.  Charlemagne]  also  received  the  acts 
directly  from  Constantinople  according  to  Roger  Hovedon.  These  prelates,  thus  furnished 
with  an  authentic  copy  and  not  a  mere  translation,  composed  a  reply  to  the  synod " 
(Treatise  on  the  Church,  Vol.  II.,  p.  203). 

If  Sir  William  is  right,  then  the  author  of  the  Caroline  books  is  thrown  into  a  dark 
shade  indeed,  for  either  he  was  too  ignorant  or  too  careless  to  read  the  original  Greek,  or 
else,  knowing  the  real  state  of  the  case,  deliberately  misrepresented  the  synod.  Sir  William 
feels  this  difficulty,  and,  a  few  lines  below  the  sentence  I  have  quoted,  attributes  the  misstate- 
ments to  a  "mistranslation,"  viz.  the  false  statement — upon  which  alone  all  the  rest  hung — 
attributed  to  the  bishop  of  Cyprus.  But  the  two  claims  are  contraria  inter  se.  If  they 
were  using  an  authentic  copy  of  the  original  sent  from  Constantinople  then  they  could  not 
have  been  misled  by  a  "  mistranslation  ; "  if  they  used  a  mistranslation  and  took  no  pains  to 
read  the  decrees,  their  opinion  and  their  writings — as  well  as  the  decrees  which  followed 

P  p   2 


580  II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


from  them — were  evidently  entirely  without  theological  value,  and  this  is  the  estimation  in 
which  they  have  been  held  by  all  unprejudiced  scholars  without  exception,  whether  agree- 
ing with  their  conclusions  or  no. 

It  will  be  well  to  set  plainly  before  the  reader  the  foundation  upon  which  rests  the 
dogmatic  teaching  of  the  Caroline  Books.  This  is,  in  short,  the  authority  of  the  Roman 
See.  That  there  may  be  no  possible  doubt  upon  this  point,  I  proceed  to  quote  somewhat  at 
length  chapter  vi.,  of  Book  I.  ;  the  heading  of  which  reads  as  follows  :  "  That  the  Holy 
Roman  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church  is  placed  above  all  other  Churches,  and  is  to  be  con- 
sulted at  every  turn  when  any  controversy  arises  with  regard  to  the  faith." 

"Before  entering  upon  a  discussion  of  the  witnesses  which  the  Easterns  have  absurdly 
brought  forward  in  their  Synod,  we  think  well  to  set  forth  how  greatly  the  holy  Roman 
Church  has  been  exalted  by  the  Lord  above  the  other  Churches,  and  how  she  is  to  be  con- 
sulted by  the  faithful :  and  this  is  especially  the  case  since  only  such  books  as  she  receives 
as  canonical  and  only  such  Fathers  as  she  has  recognized  by  Gelasius  and  the  other  Pontiffs, 
his  successors,  are  to  be  accepted  and  followed ;  nor  are  they  to  be  interpreted  by  the 
private  will  of  anyone,  but  wisely  and  soberly.  .  .  .  For  as  the  Apostolic  Sees  in  gen- 
eral are  to  be  preferred  to  all  the  other  dioceses  of  the  world,  much  more  is  that  see  to  be 
preferred  which  is  placed  over  all  the  other  apostolic  sees.  For  just  as  the  Apostles  were 
exalted  above  the  other  disciples,  and  Peter  was  exalted  above  the  other  Apostles,  so  the 
apostolic  sees  are  exalted  above  the  other  sees,  and  the  Roman  See  is  eminent  over  the  other 
apostolic  sees.  And  this  exaltation  arises  from  no  synodical  action  of  the  other  Churches, 
but  she  holds  the  primacy  (primatum)  by  the  authority  of  the  Lord  himself,  when  he  said, 
'  Thou  art  Peter,  etc'     .     .     . 

"  This  church,  therefore,  fortified  with  the  spiritual  arms  of  the  holy  faith,  and  satiated 
with  the  health-giving  fountains  which  flow  from  the  well  of  light  and  from  the  source  of 
goodness,  resists  the  horrible  and  atrocious  monsters  of  heresies,  and  ministers  the  honey- 
sweet  cups  of  teaching  to  the  Catholic  Churches  of  the  whole  world.  .  .  .  Whence  [i.e. 
from  St.  Jerome  consulting  the  Pope]  we  can  understand  how  Saints  and  learned  men  who 
were  shining  lights  in  different  parts  of  the  world,  not  only  did  not  depart  in  faith  from  the 
holy  Roman  Church,  but  also  asked  aid  of  her  in  time  of  necessity  for  the  strengthening  of 
the  faith.  And  this  all  Catholic  Churches  should  regularly  observe,  so  that  they  may  seek 
help  from  her,  after  Christ,  for  protecting  the  faith :  which  (quae)  having  neither  spot  nor 
wrinkle,  smites  the  portentous  heads  of  heresies,  and  strengthens  the  minds  of  the  faithful 
in  the  faith.  And  although  many  have  separated  from  this  holy  and  venerable  communion, 
nevertheless  never  have  the  Churches  of  our  part  done  so,  but  instructed  by  that  apostolical 
erudition,  and  by  his  assistance  from  whom  cometh  every  good  and  perfect  gift,  have 
always  received  the  venerable  charismata  .  .  .  ;  and  are  careful  to  follow  the  see  of 
blessed  Peter  in  all  things,  as  they  desire  thither  to  arrive  where  he  sits  as  keeper  of  the 
keys.  To  which  blessedness  may  he  who  deigned  to  found  his  Church  upon  Peter  bring  us, 
and  make  us  to  persevere  in  the  unity  of  the  holy  Church  ;  and  may  we  merit  a  place  in 
that  kingdom  of  heaven  through  the  intervention  of  him  whose  See  we  follow  and  to  whom 
have  been  given  the  keys." 

Such  is  the  doctrinal  foundation  of  the  Caroline  books,  viz.:  the  absolute  authority  of  the 
Roman  See  in  matters  pertaining  to  the  faith  of  the  Church.  It  is  certainly  very  difficult  to 
understand  how  the  author  of  these  books  could  have  known  that  the  doctrinal  decree  of 
the  Synod  of  Nice  had  received  the  approbation  of  this  supreme  power  which  it  was  so 
necessary  to  consult  and  defer  to  ;  and  that  the  Synod  which  he  denounces  and  rejects  had 
been  received  by  that  chief  of  all  the  Apostolic  Sees  as  the  Seventh  of  the  Ecumenical  Coun- 
cils of  the  Catholic  Church. 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787  581 


Whether  the  author  [or  authors]  had  ever  seen  the  Pope's  letter  or  no,  one  thing  is  cer- 
tain, he  never  read  with  any  care  even  the  imperfect  translation  with  which  he  had  been 
furnished,  and  of  that  translation  Anastasius  Bibliothetius  says  :  "  The  translator  both 
misunderstood  the  genius  of  the  Greek  language  as  well  as  that  of  the  Latin,  and  has  merely 
translated  word  for  word  ;  and  in  such  a  fashion  that  it  is  scarcely  ever  possible  to  know 
(aut  vix  aid  nunguam)  what  it  means ;  moreover  nobody  ever  reads  this  translation  and  no 
copies  of  it  are  made. " 1 

This  being  the  case,  when  we  come  to  examine  the  Caroline  Books,  we  are  not  astonished 
to  find  them  full  of  false  statements. 

In  the  Preface  we  are  told  that  the  Conciliabulum  was  "held  in  Bithynia ;  "  of  course  as  a 
matter  of  fact  it  met  in  Constantinople. 

In  Bk.  I.,  chapter  j.,  we  find  certain  words  said  to  occur  in  the  letters  of  the  Empress  and 
her  son.  On  this  Hefele  remarks  :  "  One  cannot  find  the  words  in  either  of  the  two  letters 
of  these  sovereigns,  which  are  preserved  in  the  acts  of  the  Council  of  Nice,  it  is  the  synod 
that  uses  them.2" 

In  the  Second  Book,  chapter  xxvij.,  the  council  is  charged  with  saying  "Just  as  the 
Lord's  body  and  blood  pass  over  from  fruits  of  the  earth  to  a  notable  mystery,  so  also  the 
images,  made  by  the  skill  of  the  artificers,  pass  over  to  the  veneration  of  those  persons 
whose  images  they  bear."  Now  this  was  never  said  nor  taught  by  the  Nicene  Synod,  but 
something  like  it  was  taught  by  the  Constantinopolitan  conciliabulum  of  754  ;  but  the  very 
words  cited  occur  neither  in  the  one  set  of  acts  nor  in  the  other !  The  underlying  thought 
however  was,  as  we  have  said,  clearly  exposed  by  the  iconoclastic  synod  of  754  and  as  clearly 
refuted  by  the  orthodox  synod  of  787. 

In  Book  III.,  chapter  V.,  we  are  told  that  "  Tarasius  said  in  his  confession  of  faith  that 
the  Holy  Spirit  was  the  companion  (contribulum  in  the  Caroline  Books)  of  the  Father  and  of 
the  Son."  It  was  not  Tarasius  who  said  so  at  all,  but  Theodore  of  Jerusalem,  and  in  using 
the  word  6/xo<£iAos  he  was  but  copying  Sophronius  of  Jerusalem. 

Chapter  XVII.  begins  thus:  "How  rashly  and  (so  to  speak)  like  a  fool,  Constantine, 
bishop  of  Constantia  in  Cyprus,  spoke  when  he  said,  with  the  approval  of  the  rest  of  the 
bishops,  that  he  would  receive  and  honourably  embrace  the  images  ;  and  babbled  that  the 
service  of  adoration  which  is  due  to  the  consubstantial  and  life-giving  Trinity,  should  be 
given  images,  we  need  not  here  discuss,  since  to  all  who  either  read  or  hear  this  it  will  be 
clear  that  he  was  swamped  in  no  small  error,  to  wit  to  confess  that  he  exhibited  to  creatures 
the  service  due  to  the  Creator  alone,  and  through  his  desire  to  favour  the  pictures  over- 
turned all  the  Holy  Scriptures.  For  what  sane  man  ever  either  said  or  thought  of  saying 
such  an  absurdity,  as  that  different  pictures  should  be  held  in  the  same  honour  as  the  holy, 
victorious  Trinity,  the  creator  of  all  things,  etc."  But  as  will  be  seen  by  a  glance  at  the  acts 
this  is  exactly  the  opposite  of  what  Constantine  did  say.  Now  if,  as  Sir  William  Palmer 
asserts,  the  author  had  before  him  the  genuine  acts  in  the  original,  I  do  not  see  how  his 
honesty  can  be  defended,  or  if  his  honesty  is  kept  intact,  it  must  be  at  the  expense  of  his 
learning  or  carefulness.  Bower  felt  this  so  keenly  that  he  thinks  the  Caroline  Books  attrib- 
ute the  words  to  Constantine  the  bishop  alone  and  not  to  the  council.  But  the  subter- 
fuge is  vain,  for,  as  we  have  just  seen,  the  author  affirms  that  Constantine's  speech  received 
"  the  assent  of  the  rest  of  the  bishops  (cceteris  consentientibus) ,"  and  further  not  obscurely 
suggests  that  Constantine  had  the  courage  to  say  what  the  others  were  content  to  think, 
but  did  not  dare  to  say. 

In  Book  IV.,  the  third  chapter  distinctly  states  that  while  lights  and  incense  were  used 

1  Manei,  Tom.  xii.,  981,  2  Hefele.  Hist,  of  Councils,  Bk  xx.,  chap,  ij.,  §  400. 


582  II.  NICE.     A.D.   787 

by  them  in  their  churches,  yet  that  neither  the  one  nor  the  other  was  placed  before  images. 
If  this  can  be  relied  upon  it  would  seem  to  fix  the  Frankish  custom  of  that  date. 

Chapters  XIV.  and  XX.  are  distinguished  by  the  most  glaring  blunders,  for  they  attrib- 
ute to  the  Council  of  Nice  the  teachings  of  the  Conciliabulum,  and  in  particular  they  lay 
them  to  the  door  of  Gregory  of  Neocsesarea  because  he  it  was  who  read  them. 

Finally,  in  chapter  the  twenty-eighth,  the  ecumenical  character  of  II.  Nice  is  denied,  on 
the  ground  that  it  has  not  preserved  the  faith  of  the  Fathers,  and  that  it  was  not  universal 
in  its  constitution.  I  beg  the  reader,  who  has  fresh  in  his  memory  the  Papal  claims  set 
forth  in  a  previous  chapter,  to  consider  whether  it  is  possible  that  the  author  of  that  chapter 
should  have  seen  and  known  of  the  Papal  acceptance  of  the  Seventh  Synod  and  yet  have 
written  as  follows  :  "Among  all  the  inanities  said  and  done  by  this  synod,  this  does  not 
seem  by  any  means  to  be  the  least,  that  they  styled  it  ecumenical,  for  it  neither  held  the 
purity  of  the  ecumenical  faith,  nor  did  it  obtain  authority  through  the  ecumenical  action  of 
the  Churches.  ...  If  this  synod  had  kept  clear  of  novelties  and  had  rested  satisfied 
with  the  teachings  of  the  ancient  Fathers,  it  might  have  been  styled  ecumenical.  But  since 
it  was  not  contented  with  the  teachings  of  the  ancient  Fathers  it  cannot  be  styled  ecumeni- 
cal," etc.,  etc. 

Such  are  in  brief  the  contents  and  spirit  of  the  Caroline  Books.  Binius  indeed  says 
that  he  found  a  twenty-ninth  chapter  in  a  French  MS.  of  Hadrian's  Epistle.  It  is  lacking 
in  the  ordinary  codices.  Petavius  thinks  it  was  added  by  the  Council  of  Fi-ankfort.  It  is 
found  in  Migne  (col.  1218)  and  the  main  point  is  that  St.  Gregory's  advice  is  to  be  followed, 
viz.  :  "  We  permit  images  of  the  Saints  to  be  made  by  whoever  is  so  disposed,  as  well  in 
churches  as  out  of  them,  for  the  love  of  God  and  of  his  Saints  ;  but  never  compel  anyone 
who  does  not  wish  to  do  so  to  bow  to  them  (adorare  eas) ;  nor  do  we  permit  anyone  to 
destroy  them,  even  if  he  should  so  desire."  I  cannot  but  think  that  this  would  be  a  very 
lame  conclusion  to  all  the  denunciation  of  the  preceding  chapters. 

FV.     The  Chief  Cause  of  Trouble  a  Logomachy. 

Now  from  all  this  one  thing  is  abundantly  clear,  that  the  great  point  set  forth  with  such 
learning  and  perspicuity  by  the  Seventh  Synod,  to  wit,  the  distinction  between  Xarpeta  and 
■n-posKw/eo-is  was  wholly  lost  upon  these  Frankish  writers  ;  and  that  their  translation  of  both 
words  by  "  adoro  "  gave  rise  to  nine-tenths  of  the  trouble  that  followed.  The  student  of 
ecclesiastical  history  will  remember  how  a  similar  logomachy  followed  nearly  every  one  of  the 
Ecumenical  Synods,  and  will  not  therefore  be  astonished  to  find  it  likewise  here.  The 
"homousion,"  the  "theotocos,"  the  "two  natures,"  "the  two  wills,"  each  one  gave  rise  to 
heated  discussion  in  different  sections  of  the  Church,  even  after  it  had  been  accepted  and 
approved  by  a  Synod  which  no  one  now  for  an  instant  disputes  to  have  been  ecumenical. 

Moreover,  that  after  this  serious  error  and  bungling  on  the  part  of  the  Caroline  divines 
and  of  the  French  and  Allemanic  Churches,  the  Pope  did  not  proceed  to  enforce  the  accept- 
ance of  the  council  will  not  cause  astonishment  to  any  who  are  familiar  with  what  St. 
Athanasius  said  with  regard  to  the  Semi-Arians,  who  even  after  I.  Nice  refused  to  use  the 
word  "  homousios  ; "  or  with  the  extreme  gentleness  and  moderation  of  St.  Cyril  of  Alexan- 
dria in  his  treatment  of  John  of  Antioch. 

Perhaps  before  leaving  the  subject  I  should  give  here  the  chief  strictures  which  Hefele 
makes  upon  these  books  (§  400). 

(1)  The  Caroline  Books  condemn  passages  which  they  quote  (without  saying  so)  from 
Pope  Hadrian's  own  letter  to  the  Empress. 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787  583 


(2)  They  blame  St.  Basil  for  teaching  that  the  reverence  done  to  the  image  passes  on  to 
the  prototype. 

(3)  They  treat  St.  Gregory  Nyssen  with  contempt,  and  refuse  to  listen  to  him  (Lib.  II., 
c.  xvij.). 

(4)  They  are  full  of  most  careless  and  inexcusable  blunders. 

(a)  They  attribute  to  the  Emperors  a  phrase  which  belongs  to  the  Synod  (I.  j.). 

(b)  They  confound  Leontius  with  John  (I.  xxj.). 

(c)  They  confound  Tarasius  with  Theodore  of  Jerusalem  (III.  v.). 

(d)  They  impute  to  the  Council  the  opinions  of  the  Iconoclastic  Conciliabulum 

(IV.,  xiv.  and  xx.). 

(e)  They  attribute  to  Epiphanius  the  deacon  the  propositions  of  others  when  he 

merely  read  (IV.,  xv.) 

It  had  usually  been  supposed  that  these  Four  Books  were  the  "  qusedam  capitula"  which 
Charlemagne  had  sent  by  Angelbert  to  Pope  Hadrian  "  to  be  corrected  by  his  judgment  (ut 
illius  judicio  corrigerentur).  Considering  the  nature  of  the  contents  of  the  Caroline  Books  as 
we  now  have  them,  such  would  seem  d  priori  highly  improbable,  but  this  matter  has  been 
practically  settled,  as  we  have  already  pointed  out,  by  Bishop  Hefele,  who  has  shown  from 
Pope  Hadrian's  answer  "  correcting  "  those  "  capitula,"  that  they  must  have  been  entirely 
different  in  order  though  no  doubt  their  contents  were  similar.  The  differing  views  of  Peta- 
vius  and  Walch  will  be  found  in  full  in  Hefele  (§  401). 

In  concluding  his  masterly  treatment  of  this  whole  matter,  Hefele  makes  (§  402)  a 
remark  well  worthy  of  repetition  in  this  place : 

"  The  great  friendship  which  Charles  shewed  to  Pope  Hadrian  down  to  the  hour  of  his 
death  proves  that  their  way  of  thinking  with  regard  to  the  cultus  of  images  was  not  so 
opposite  as  many  suppose,  and — above  all — as  many  have  tried  to  make  out. " 

I  shall  close  this  matter  with  the  admirably  learned  and  judicious  words  of  Michaud. 

"  No  doubt  there  had  been  abuses  in  connexion  with  the  worship  of  images  ;  but  the 
Council  of  Nice  never  approved  of  these.  No  doubt,  too,  certain  marks  of  veneration  used 
in  the  East  were  not  practised  in  Gaul  ;  but  the  Council  of  Nice  did  not  go  into  these  par- 
ticulars. It  merely  determined  the  principle,  to  wit,  the  lawfulness  and  moral  necessity  of 
honouring  the  holy  images  ;  and  in  doing  this  it  did  not  in  any  degree  innovate.  Charle- 
magne ought  to  have  known  this,  for,  already  in  the  sixth  century  Fortunatus,  in  his  Poem 
on  St.  Martin,  tells  how  in  Gaul  they  lighted  lamps  before  the  images.1  The  great  point 
that  Charlemagne  made  was  that  what  was  called  in  the  West  '  adoration,'  in  the  strict 
sense  (that  is  to  say  the  worship  of  Latria)  should  be  rendered  to  none  other  than  God ;  now 
this  is  exactly  the  doctrine  of  the  Council  of  Nice.  Charlemagne  himself  admits  that  the 
learned  may  venerate  images,  meaning  thereby  that  the  veneration  is  really  addressed  to  the 
prototypes,  but  that  such  veneration  is  a  source  of  scandal  to  the  ignorant  who  in  the  image 
venerate 2  nothing  but  the  material  image  itself  (Lib.  III.,  cap.  xvj.)."  3 

EXCURSUS  ON  THE  COUNCIL  OF  FRANKFORT,  A.  D.  794. 

It  has  been  commonly  represented  that  the  Council  of  Frankfort,  which  was  a  large 
Synod  of  the  West,  with  legates  of  the  Pope  present  and  composed  of  the  bishops  of  Gaul, 
Germany,  and  Aquitaine,  devoted  its  attention  to  a  consideration  of  the  question  of  the  ven- 

1  "  Here  on  the  wall  is  an  image  of  the  Saint  and  under  its  feet  2  "  And  adore  "  in  the  Latin, 

a  little  window,  and  a  lamp,  in  the  glass  bowl  of  which  the  fire  >  Michaud.    Discussion  sur  Us  Sept  Conciles  (Ecumeniques,  p. 

burns."    Fortnn.  (Migne.,  Pat.  Lett.,  Tom.  LXXXVII1.)  De  Vita  300. 
S.  Martin,  Lib.  iv.,  690  (col.  426). 


584  II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


eration  due  to  images  and  of  the  claims  of  the  Second  Council  of  Nice  to  being  an  Ecu- 
menical Synod.  I  do  not  know  upon  what  grounds  such  statements  have  rested,  but 
certainly  not  upon  anything  revealed  by  any  remains  of  the  council  we  possess,  for  among 
these  we  find  but  one  brief  paragraph  upon  the  subject,  to  wit,  the  Second  Canon,  which 
reads  as  follows  (Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  vii.,  col.  1057)  : 

"  II.  The  question  was  brought  forward  concerning  the  recent  synod  which  the  Greeks 
had  held  at  Constantinople  concerning  the  adoration  of  images,  that  all  should  be  judged  as 
worthy  of  anathema  who  did  not  pay  to  the  images  of  the  Saints  service  and  adoration  as  to 
the  Divine  Trinity.  Our  most  holy  fathers  rejected  with  scorn  and  in  every  way  such  adora- 
tion and  service,  and  unanimously  condemned  it." 

Now  in  the  first  place  I  call  the  reader's  attention  to  the  fact  that  the  Conciliabulum  of 
754  was  held  at  Constantinople  but  that  the  Seventh  Council  was  held  at  Nice.  It  would 
seem  as  if  the  two  had  got  mixed  in  the  mind  of  the  writer.1 

In  the  second  place  neither  of  these  synods,  nor  any  other  synod,  decreed  that  the  "  ser- 
vice "  (karpeia)  and  "  adoration  "  {rrpoa-Kw-qa-^)  due  to  the  holy  Trinity  was  under  pain  of  anath- 
ema to  be  given  to  "  the  images  of  the  Saints." 

On  this  second  canon  Hefele  writes  as  follows  : 

(Hefele.     Condi.,  §  398). 

The  second  of  these  canons  deserves  our  full  attention  ;  in  it,  as  we  have  seen,  the  Synod 
of  Frankfort  expresses  its  feeling  against  the  Second  Ecumenical  Council  of  Nice,  and 
against  the  veneration  of  images  ;  Eginhard  also  gives  us  the  information  that  it  took  this 
action,  viz. :  "for  it  was  decided  by  all  [i.  e.  at  Frankfort]  that  the  synod,  which  a  few  years 
before  was  gathered  together  in  Constantinople  (sic)  under  Irene  and  her  son  Constantine, 
and  is  called  by  them  not  only  the  Seventh  but  also  Ecumenical,  should  neither  be  held  nor 
declared  to  be  the  Seventh  nor  ecumenical  but  wholly  without  authority." 

Hefele  rejects  the  views  of  Baronius,  Bellarmine,  Surius,  and  Binius.  I  have  no  inten- 
tion of  defending  the  position  of  any  one  of  these  writers  but  I  translate  Binius's  note,  merely 
remarking  that  it  is  easier  to  reject  his  conclusion  than  to  answer  the  arguments  upon 
which  it  rests. 

(Severinus  Binius,  Labbe  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  VII.,  col.  1070.) 

Baronius  was  of  opinion  that  the  Second  Council  of  Nice  was  condemned  by  this  council  ; 
and  before  him  Bellarmine  had  taught  the  same  thing.  But  two  things  make  me  dissent 
from  their  conclusion : 

First.  That  as  the  history  and  acts  of  this  council  inform  us  that  the  legates  of  Pope 
Hadrian  (whom  Ado  in  his  chronology  names  Theophylact  and  Stephen)  were  present  at  this 
council,  it  was  not  possible  that  the  whole  council  was  ignorant  by  what  authority  the  true 
Seventh  Council  was  assembled  at  Nice,  and  what  its  decrees  had  been.  For  as  this  Synod 
at  Nice  was  assembled  under  the  same  Pontiff,  the  legates  of  that  same  Pontiff  could  not 
have  been  ignorant  of  its  authority  and  teaching.  Therefore  even  if  false  rumours  concern- 
ing the  Seventh  Synod  had  been  scattered  about,  as  Genebrardus  affirms  (on  what  founda- 
tion I  know  not),  the  Fathers  of  the  Council  of  Frankfort  could  have  been  instructed  by  the 
papal  legates,  and  been  given  information  and  taught  what  were  the  writings  of  that  Seventh 
Council.  Moreover  since  the  celebration  of  that  Nicene  Council  was  an  event  most  celebrat- 
ed and  most  widely  published  throughout  the  whole  Church,  it  is  not  credible  that  among 

1  This  has  been  explained  by  saying  that  the  last  meeting  was  in  the  palace  at  Constantinople. 


II.  NICE.     A.D.  787  585 


the  bishops  of  all  France  and  Germany,  assembled  in  this  place,  no  single  one  was  found 
who  had  accurate  information  concerning  the  manner  in  which  the  Council  of  Nice  was  as- 
sembled, or  of  how  it  had  received  the  approval  of  the  Supreme  Pontiff.  For  as  a  matter  of 
fact,  that  error  of  adoring  images  as  gods  is  rather  an  error  of  the  Gentiles  than  of  any  here- 
tics or  of  any  who  profess  the  faith  of  Christ.  Therefore  in  no  way  is  it  credible  that  the 
fathers  of  the  Council  of  Frankfort  should  have  thought  this,  or  rashly  on  account  of  certain 
rumours  have  believed  this  ;  especially  since  at  that  time  in  no  Church  was  there  the  suspi- 
cion of  any  such  error  ;  and  the  bishops  of  the  council  were  too  pious  and  Catholic  to  allow 
the  suspicion  that  out  of  base  enmity  to  the  Orientals  they  were  led  to  attribute  error  to 
the  fathers  of  the  most  sacred  Council  of  Nice,  or  that  they  would  have  attached  an  heretical 
sense  to  their  decision. 

Another  reason  is  this ;  that  the  fathers  of  this  council  often  made  profession  of  acting 
under  the  obedience  of  the  Koman  Pontiffs  ;  and  in  the  book  Sacrosyllabus  at  the  end,  when 
they  gave  sentence  against  the  heretics,  they  subjoin  these  words:  "The  privilege  of  our 
lord  and  father  the  Supreme  Pontiff,  Hadrian  I.,  Pope  of  the  most  blessed  See,  being  in  all 
respects  maintained."  And  this  same  principle  the  same  fathers  often  professed  in  this 
council,  that  they  followed  the  tradition  of  their  predecessors,  and  did  not  depart  from  their 
footsteps  ;  and  that  Charlemagne,  who  was  present  at  this  council,  in  his  letter  to  the  Spanish 
bishops,  said  that  in  the  first  place  he  had  consulted  the  pontiff  of  the  Apostolic  See,  what 
he  thought  concerning  the  matter  treated  of  in  that  council :  and  that  a  little  further  on  he 
adds  these  words :  "  I  am  united  to  the  Apostolic  See,  and  to  the  ancient  Catholic  traditions 
which  have  come  down  from  the  beginnings  of  the  new-born  Church,  with  my  whole  mind, 
and  with  complete  alacrity  of  heart." 

Now  the  fathers  of  this  council  could  not  make  such  a  profession  if  they  had  condemned 
the  Sacrosant  Synod  of  Nice,  which  had  been  confirmed  by  the  Apostolic  See.  For  as  I 
have  shown  above  they  could  not  have  been  misled  by  false  information  upon  this  point. 
If  therefore  knowingly  and  through  heretical  pravity  they  did  these  things,  so  too  they  did 
them  out  of  pertinacity  and  heresy  ;  and  so  concerning  the  authority  of  the  Apostolic  See 
one  way  they  had  thought  and  another  way  spoken.  But  in  my  judgment  such  things  are 
not  to  be  imputed  to  so  great  and  to  such  an  assembly  of  bishops,  for  it  is  not  likely  that 
the  fathers  of  this  council,  in  the  presence  of  the  legates  of  the  Supreme  Pontiff  and  of  a 
Catholic  Prince,  would  have  condemned  the  Seventh  Synod,  confirmed  as  it  was  by  the 
authority  of  the  Pontiff  and  have  referred  the  matter  to  Hadrian  the  Supreme  Pontiff. 

Moreover  it  would  have  surely  come  to  pass  that  if  the  Nicene  Council  had  been  con- 
demned by  the  authority  of  this  synod,  and  so  the  error  of  the  Iconoclasts  had  been  approved 
through  erroneous  information,  before  our  days  some  follower  of  that  error  would  have  tried 
to  back  up  himself  and  his  opinion  by  its  authority  :  but  no  one  did  this,  and  this  is  all  the 
more  noteworthy  since,  only  shortly  after  the  time  of  Charlemagne,  Claudius  of  Turin  sprang 
up  in  that  very  Gaul,  and  wished  to  introduce  that  error  into  the  Western  Church,  and  he 
could  have  confirmed  his  teaching  in  the  highest  manner  if  he  could  have  shewn  that  that 
plenary  council  of  the  West  had  confirmed  his  error.  But  as  a  matter  of  fact  Claudius  did 
not  quote  it  in  his  favour  ;  nor  did  Jonas  of  Orleans,  who  wrote  against  him  at  that  time, 
and  overthrew  his  foundations,  make  any  mention  in  this  respect  of  the  Council  of  Frank- 
fort in  his  response. 

Lastly  I  add  that  the  Roman  Church  never  gave  its  approbation  and  received  any  pro- 
vincial synod,  so  far  as  one  part  of  its  action  was  concerned  while  in  another  part  it  was 
persistently  heretical.  But  this  provincial  council  so  far  as  it  defined  concerning  the  servi- 
tude and  filiation  of  Christ  was  received  and  approved  by  the  Church,  it  is  not  then  credi- 
ble that  in  the  same  council  the  Nicene  Synod  would  have  been  condemned. 


586  II.  NICE.     A.D.  787 


I  need  only  add  that  every  proposed  theory  is  so  full  of  difficulties  as  to  seem  to  involve 
more  absurdities  and  improbabilities  than  it  explains.  The  reader  is  referred  especially  to 
Vasquez  (De  adorat.  imag.,  Lib.  II.,  Dispt.  VII.,  cap.  vij.)  and  to  Suarez  (Tom.  I,  Disp.  LIV., 
Sec.  iij.),  for  learned  and  instructive  discussions  of  the  whole  matter. 


EXCURSUS  ON  THE  CONVENTION  SAID  TO  HAVE  BEEN  HELD  IN  PARIS. 

A.D.  825. 

It  is  curious  that  besides  the  Cai'oline  Books  and  the  second  canon  of  Frankfort,  another 
matter  of  great  difficulty  springs  up  with  regard  to  the  subject  of  the  authority  of  the 
Seventh  Synod.  In  1596  there  appeared  what  claims  to  be  an  ancient  account  of  a  conven- 
tion of  bishops  in  Paris  in  the  year  824. :  The  point  in  which  this  interests  us  is  that  the 
bishops  at  this  meeting  are  supposed  to  have  condemned  the  Seventh  Council,  and  to  have 
approved  the  Caroline  books.  The  whole  story  was  rejected  by  Cardinal  Bellarmine  and  he 
promptly  wrote  a  refutation.  Sismondi  accepted  this  view  of  the  matter,  and  Labbe  has 
excluded  the  pretended  proceedings  from  his  "  Concilia  "  altogether. 

But  while  scholars  are  agreed  that  the  assigned  date  is  impossible  and  that  it  must  be 
825,  they  have  usually  accepted  the  facts  as  true,  I  need  not  mention  others  than  such 
widely  differing  authors  as  Fleury  (Hist.  Eccles.,  Lib.  xlvij.  iv.),  Roisselet  de  Sauclieres  (Hist. 
Chronol,  Tome  III.,  No.  792,  p.  385),  and  Hefele  (Concilien.  §  425). 

It  would  be  the  height  of  presumption  were  I  to  express  any  opinion  upon  this  most 
disputed  point,  the  reader  will  find  the  whole  matter  at  length  in  Walch  (Bd.  XL,  S.  135, 
139).  I  only  here  note  that  if  the  account  be  genuine,  then  it  is  an  established  fact  that  as 
late  as  825,  an  assembly  of  bishops  rejected  an  Ecumenical  Council  accepted  by  the  pope, 
and  further  charged  the  Supreme  Pontiff  with  having  "  commanded  men  to  adore  supersti- 
tiously  images  (quod  superstitiose  eas  adorare  jussit),"  and  asked  the  reigning  Pontiff  to  correct 
the  errors  of  his  predecessors,  and  all  this  without  any  reproof  from  the  Holy  See  ! 

Hefele  points  out  also  that  they  not  only  entirely  misrepresent  the  teaching  of  Hadrian 
and  the  Seventh  Council,  but  that  they  also  cite  a  passage  from  St.  Augustine,  "which 
teaches  exactly  the  opposite  of  that  Avhich  this  synod  would  make  out,  for  the  passage  says 
that  the  word  colere  can  be  applied  to  men." 


HISTORICAL    NOTE    ON    THE    SO-CALLED    "EIGHTH    GENERAL    COUNCIL" 

AND   SUBSEQUENT   COUNCILS. 

Whatever  may  be  the  final  verdict  of  history  with  regard  to  the  Caroline  books,  to  the 
action  of  this  Synod  of  Frankfort,  and  to  the  genuineness  of  the  account  of  the  Convention  of 
Paris,  there  can  be  no  doubt  with  regard  to  the  position  held  by  the  Seventh  of  the  Ecu- 
menical Synods  in  all  subsequent  conciliar  action. 

In  869  -  was  held  at  Constantinople  what  both  the  Easterns  and  Westerns  then  considered 
to  be  the  Eighth  of  the  Ecumenical  Synods.  Its  chief  concern  was  to  restore  peace  and  it 
thought  to  accomplish  this  by  taking  the  strongest  position  against  Photius.  At  this  Synod 
the  Second  Council  of  Nice  was  accepted  in  the  most  explicit  manner,  not  only  its  teaching 
but  also  its  rank  and  number.3 


'This  is  reprinted  in  full  in  Mansi,  and  from  him  in  Migne's  '  3  The  definition  of  faith  says:  "also  we  confess  that  the 
l'at.  Lat.,  Tom.  XCVIII  .  col.  1299,  et  seqq.  Cardinal  Bellar-  Seventh  Holy  and  Ecumenical  synod,  which  met  in  Nice  for  the 
mine's  refutation  is  also  found  in  Migne's  Charlemagne,  and  in  second  time,  taught  in  accordance  with  orthodoxy,  etc."  (Labbe 
Labbe  and  Cossart,  Tom.  VII.,  of  the  Concilia.  \  and  Cossart,  Concilia,  Tom.  VIII.,  col.  1147.) 

3  Hefele.     Concilien,  §  487,  also  Fleury. 


II.  MCE.     A.D.  787  587 


But  not  many  years  afterwards  Photius  again  got  the  upper  hand  and  another  synod  was 
held,  also  at  Constantinople,  in  a.d.  879,  which  restored  Photius  and  which  was  afterwards 
accepted  by  many  Easterns  as  the  Eighth  of  the  Ecumenical  Synods.  But  at  this  synod,  as. 
well  as  in  that  of  869,  the  position  of  Second  Nice  was  fully  acknowledged.  So  that  after 
that  date,  roughly  speaking  one  century  after  the  meeting  of  the  Seventh  Synod,  despite  all 
opposition  it  was  universally  recognized  and  revered,  even  by  those  who  were  so  rapidly 
drifting  further  and  further  apart  as  were  the  East  and  West  in  the  time  of  Photius  and  his 
successors. 

At  the  Council  of  Lyons  in  a.d.  1274  there  was  consent  on  all  hands  that  all  were 
united  in  accepting  the  Seven  Synods  as  a  basis  of  union. 

And  finally  when  the  acts  and  agreements  of  the  Council  of  Florence  (1438)  appeared  in 
the  first  edition  issued  under  papal  authority,  that  synod  was  styled  the  "Eighth,"  and  in 
this  there  was  no  accident,  for  during  the  debate  the  Cardinal  Julian  Csesarini  had  asked 
the  Greeks  for  the  proceedings  of  the  Eighth  Synod  and  Mark  answered  :  "  We  cannot  be 
forced  to  count  that  synod  as  ecumenical,  since  we  do  not  at  all  recognize  it  but  in  fact 
reject  it.     ...  A  few  years  afterwards  was  held  a  second  synod  which  restored  Photius 

and  annulled  the  acts  of  the  preceding  assembly,  and  this  synod  also  bears  the  title  of  the 
Eighth  Ecumenical.  But  Cardinal  Julian  did  not  enter  on  any  defence  of  the  Ecumenical 
character  of  this  so-called  "Eighth  Synod."  ' 

For  the  purposes  of  this  discussion,  the  matter  is  perfectly  clear,  and  even  if  some  later 
writers  speak  still  of  the  "  Six  Ecumenical  Councils  "  in  doing  so  they  are  rejecting  the 
Eighth  as  much  as  the  Seventh  ;  in  fact  they  ai-e  rejecting  neither,  but  speaking  as  did  St. 
Gregory,  who  still  mentioned  the  Four  General  Councils  and  compared  them  to  the  Four 
Gospels,  although  the  fifth  had  been  already  held.  Those  few  Frankish  writers  who  con- 
tinued to  speak  of  II.  Nice  as  a  pseudo  council  did  so  out  of  ignorance  or  else  in  contrariety 
to  the  teaching  of  the  Roman  Church  to  whose  obedience  they  professed  subjection.  It  is 
no  place  of  mine  to  offer  moral  reflections  upon  their  doings. 

1  For  which  Baronius  condemns  him  in  his  Annates,  a.d.  869. 


APPENDIX  CONTAINING  CANONS  AND  RULINGS  NOT  HAV- 
ING CONCILIAR  ORIGIN  BUT  APPROVED  BY  NAME  IN 
CANON  II.   OF  THE  SYNOD   IN  TRULLO. 


Elenchus. 


Prefatory  note. 

Introduction  to  the  Apostolical  Canons. 

The  85  Apostolical  Canons. 

Epitome  of  the  Canons  of  the  following  : 

I.  Dionysius  of  Alexandria. 

II.  Peter  of  Alexandria. 

III.  Gregory  Thaumaturgus. 

IV.  Athanasius  of  Alexandria. 

V.  Basil  of  Ccesarea. 


VI.  Gregory  Nyssen. 

VII.  Gregory  Theologus. 

VIII.  Amphilochius  of  Iconium. 

IX.  Timothy  of  Alexandria. 

X.  Theophilus  of  Alexandria. 

XI.  Cyril  of  Alexandria. 

XII.  Gennadius  of  Constantinople.1 


1  For  some  reason  Beveridge  does  not  follow,  as  I  have  done, 
the  order  of  the  enumeration  in  the  Trullan  Canon.  Johnson 
has  followed  Beveridge's  order. 


PREFATORY   NOTE. 

As  this  volume  only  professes  to  contain  the  conciliar  decrees  of  the  Ecumenical  Coun- 
cils, it  would  seem  that  canons  and  rulings  which  were  of  private  or  quasi-private  origin 
should  have  no  place  in  it ;  and  yet  a  very  considerable  number  of  such  determinations  are 
expressly  approved  by  name  in  the  Canons  of  the  Synod  in  Trullo,  which  canons  were 
received,  to  some  extent  at  least  (as  we  have  seen),  by  the  Seventh  Ecumenical  Council. 
Under  these  circumstances  I  have  felt  that  the  reader  might  justly  expect  to  find  some  men- 
tion made  of  these  decrees,  which  while  indeed  non-conciliar  in  origin,  yet  had  received  such 
high  conciliar  sanction.  I  have  therefore  placed  a  translation  of  the  text  of  the  "  Apostoli- 
cal Canons  "  with  a  brief  introduction,  and  have  reprinted  Johnson's  epitome  of  the  other 
decrees  and  canons,  supplying  a  few  omissions  and  adding  a  few  notes,  chiefly  taken  from 
the  Greek  scholiasts,  Zonaras  and  Balsamon.  It  is  hoped  that  thus  the  present  volume  has 
been  made  practically  complete,  and  that  from  it  any  student  can  obtain  a  satisfactory 
knowledge  of  all  the  doctrinal  definitions  and  of  all  the  disciplinary  enactments  of  the 
undivided  Church. 


THE   APOSTOLICAL   CANONS. 


INTRODUCTION. 


To  affirm  that  the  "  Apostolical  Canons  " 
were  a  collection  of  canons  made  by  the 
Apostles  would  be  about  as  sensible  as  to  af- 
firm that  the  "  Psalterium  Davidicum  "  l  was 
a  collection  of  his  own  psalms  made  by  David, 
or  that  the  "  Proverbs  of  Solomon  "  was  a 
collection  of  proverbs  made  by  Solomon. 

Many  of  the  Psalms  had  David  for  their 
composer ;  many  of  the  Proverbs  had  Solo- 
mon for  their  originator  ;  but  neither  the  book 
we  call  "  The  Psalter  "  nor  the  book  we  call 
"  The  Proverbs "  had  David  or  Solomon  for 
its  compiler.  The  matter  contained  in  the 
one  is  largely,  many  think  chiefly,  of  Davidic 
origin,  the  matter  contained  in  the  other  is  no 
doubt  Solomonic  ;  and  just  so  "  The  Apos- 
tolical Canons  "  may  well  be  to  a  great  extent 
of  AjDostolic  origin,  committed  to  writing, 
some  possibly  by  the  Apostles  themselves, 
others  by  their  immediate  successors,  who 
heard  them  at  their  mouth ;  and  these  at 
some  period  not  far  removed  from  the  date 
of  the  Nicene  Council  (a.d.  325),  probably  ear- 
lier than  the  Council  of  Antioch,  were  gath- 
ered together  into  a  code  which  has  since  then 
been  somewhat  enlarged  and  modified.  This 
is  the  view  of  the  matter  to  which  the  general 
drift  of  the  learned  seems  to  be  moving,  and 
it  is  substantially  the  view  so  ably  defended 
by  Bishop  Beveridge  in  his  Synodicon,  and  in 
his  remarkably  leai'ned  and  convincing  an- 
swer to  his  French  opponent,2  entitled  Codex 
Canonum  Ecclesice  Primitives  vindicatus  ac  illus- 
tratus.  (This  last  volume,  together  with  the 
"Preface  to  the  Notes  on  the  Apostolical 
Canons  "  has  been  reprinted  in  Vol.  XII.  of 
Bishop  Beveridge's  Works  in  the  "  Library  of 
Anglo-Catholic  Theology.") 3 

In  thus  accepting  in  the  main  the  old  con- 
clusions I  am  far  from  intending  to  imply 
that  more  recent  research  has  not  shewn  some 
of  the  details  of  the  bishop's  view  to  be  er- 
roneous.     In   brief,    the   proposition    which 

1  The  reader  may  remember  that  when  it  was  proposed  in  a 
first  draft  to  the  Council  of  Trent  to  say  the  "  Psalms  of  David," 
the  Fathers  refused  to  pass  it  as  proposed,  because  the  Psalter 
contained  Psalms  not  by  David,  and  substituted  the  expression 
"The  Davidic  Psalter  "  (Psalterium  Davidicum). 

2  Matthieu  de  Larroque.  Observationes  .  .  .  et  in  Annot. 
Bev.  in  Can.  Apost.    1674. 

3  It  is  most  unfortunate  that  the  Rev.  A.  B.  Grosart,  LL  D.,  in 
the  article  "Beveridge"  in  that  usually  accurate  and  learned 
work,  the  Dictionary  of  English  Biography,  should  have  written 
"  regretting"  this  republication  of  the  Vindicatio,  on  the  ground 
that  Bp.  Beveridge  in  its  pages  "demonstrates  that  he  lacked 
the  instincts  of  the  genuine  scholar  as  distinguished  from  the 
merely  largely  read  man ! "  There  seem  to  be  a  great  many  soi- 
disant  "genuine  scholars "  who  lack  all  sense  of  humour ! 


seems  to  be  most  tenable  is  that  in  the  main 
the  Apostolic  Canons  represent  the  very  early 
canon-law  of  the  Church,  that  the  canons 
which  make  up  the  collection  are  of  various 
dates,  but  that  most  of  them  are  earlier  than 
the  year  300,  and  that  while  it  is  not  possible 
to  say  exactly  when  the  collection,  as  we  now 
have  it,  was  made,  there  is  good  reason  for 
assigning  it  a  date  not  later  than  the  middle 
of  the  fourth  century.  With  regard  to  the 
name  "  Apostolic  Canons  "  there  need  be  no 
more  hesitation  in  applying  it  to  these  can- 
ons than  in  calling  Ignatius  an  "  Apostolic 
Father,"  the  adjective  necessarily  meaning 
nothing  more  than  that  the  canons  set  forth 
the  disciplinary  principles  which  were  given 
to  the  early  Church  by  the  Apostles,  just  as 
we  speak  of  the  "  Apostles'  Creed." 

While  this  is  true  there  can  be  no  question 
that  in  the  East  the  Apostolic  Canons  were 
very  generally  looked  upon  as  a  genuine 
work  prepared  by  the  Holy  Apostles.  I  pro- 
ceed now  to  quote  Bishop  Hefele,  but  I  have 
already  (Cf.  Council  in  Trullo)  expressed  my 
own  opinion  that  there  is  not  contained  in  the 
Quinisext  decree  any  absolute  definition  of 
what  is  technically  known  as  the  "  authentic- 
ity "  of  the  Canons  of  the  Apostles. 

(Hefele.  Hist,  of  the  Councils,  Vol.  I.,  p. 
451  et  seqq.). 

The  Synod  in  Trullo  being,  as  is  well  known, 
regarded  as  ecumenical  by  the  Greek  Church, 
the  authenticity  of  the  eighty-five  canons  was 
decided  in  the  East  for  all  future  time.  It 
was  otherwise  in  the  West.  At  the  same 
period  that  Dionysius  Exiguus  translated  the 
collection  in  question  for  Bishop  Stephen, 
Pope  Gelasius  promulgated  his  celebrated 
decree  de  libris  non  recipiendis.  Drey  men- 
tions it,  but  in  a  way  which  requires  correc- 
tion. Following  in  this  the  usual  opinion,  he 
says  that  the  Synod  at  Rome  in  which  Gela- 
sius published  this  decree  was  held  in  494  ; 
but  we  shall  see  hereafter  that  this  synod  was 
held  in  496.  Also  Drey  considers  himself 
obliged  to  adopt  another  erroneous  opinion, 
according  to  which  Gelasius  declared  in  the 
same  decree  the  Apostolic  Canons  to  be  apoc- 
ryphal. This  opinion  is  to  be  maintained 
only  so  long  as  the  usual  text  of  this  decree  is 
consulted,  since  the  original  text  as  it  is  given 


592 


APPENDIX 


in  the  ancient  manuscripts  does  not  contain 
the  passage  which  mentions  the  Apostolic 
Canons.1  This  passage  was  certainly  added 
subsequently,  with  many  others,  probably  by 
Pope  Hormisdas  (514-543)  when  he  made  a 
new  edition  of  the  decree  of  Gelasius.  As 
Dionysius  Exiguus  published  his  collection  in 
all  probability  subsequently  to  the  publica- 
tion of  the  decree  of  Gelasius,  properly  so 
called,  in  496,  we  can  understand  why  this 
decree  did  not  mention  the  Apostolical 
Canons.  Dionysius  did  not  go  to  Rome 
while  Gelasius  was  living,  and  did  not  know 
him  personally,  as  he  himself  says  plainly  in 
the  Prcefatio  of  his  collection  of  the  papal 
decrees.  It  is  hence  also  plain  how  it  was 
that  in  another  collection  of  canons  subse- 
quently made  by  Dionysius,  of  which  the  pref- 
ace still  remains  to  us,  he  does  not  insert  the 
Apostolic  Canons,  but  has  simply  this  re- 
mark :  Quos  non  admisit  uniniversalitas,  ego 
quoque  in  hoc  opere  preetermisi.  Dionysius 
Exiguus  in  fact  compiled  this  new  collection 
at  a  time  when  Pope  Hormisdas  had  already 
explicitly  declared  the  Apostolic  Canons  to  be 
apocryphal. 

Notwithstanding  this,  these  canons,  and 
particularly  the  fifty  mentioned  by  Dionysius, 
did  not  entirely  fall  into  discredit  in  the 
West ;  but  rather  they  came  to  be  received, 
because  the  first  collection  of  Dionysius  was 
considered  of  great  authority.  They  also 
passed  into  other  collections,  and  particularly 
into  that  of  the  pseudo-Isidore  ;  and  in  1054, 
Humbert,  legate  of  Pope  Leo  IX.,  made  the 
following  declaration  :  Clementis  liber,  id  est  it- 
inerarium  Petri  Apostoli  et  Canones  Apostolorum 
numerantur  inter  apocrypha,  exceptis  capitulis 
qdisquaginta,  quos  decreverunt  regidis  orthodox- 
is  adjungenda.  Gratian  also,  in  his  decree, 
borrowed  from  the  fifty  Apostolic  Canons, 
and  they  gradually  obtained  the  force  of 
laws.  But  many  writers,  especially  Hincmar 
of  Rheims,  like  Dionysius  Exiguus,  raised 
doubts  upon  the  apostolical  origin  of  these 
canons.  From  the  sixteenth  century  the 
opinion  has  been  universal  that  these  docu- 
ments are  not  authentic  ;  with  the  exception, 
however,  of  the  French  Jesuit  Turrianus,  who 
endeavoured  to  defend  their  genuineness,  as 
well  as  the  authenticity  of  the  pseudo-Isido- 
rian  decrees.  According  to  the  Centuriators 
of  Magdeburg,  it  was  especially  Gabriel  d' 
Aubespine,  Bishop  of  Orleans,  the  celebrated 
Archbishop  Peter  de  Marca,  and  the  Anglican 
Beveridge,  who  proved  that  they  were  not 
really   compiled   by   the  Apostles,  but   were 

1  Cf .  Ballerini.  Opp.  S.  Leon.  St.,  Vol.  m.  p.  158 ;  Mansi.  Cone, 
Tom.  VIII. ,  170. 


made  partly  in  the  second  and  chiefly  in  the 
third  century.  Beveridge  considered  this 
collection  to  be  a  repertory  of  ancient  canons 
given  by  synods  in  the  second  and  third  cen- 
turies. In  opposition  to  them,  the  Calvinist 
Dallseus  (Daille)  regarded  it  as  the  work  of  a 
forger  who  lived  in  the  fifth  and  sixth  cen- 
turies ;  but  Beveridge  refuted  him  so  con- 
vincingly, that  from  that  time  his  opinion, 
with  some  few  modifications,  has  been  that  of 
all  the  learned. 

Beveridge  begins  with  the  principle,  that 
the  Church  in  the  very  earliest  times  must 
have  had  a  collection  of  canons  ;  and  he  de- 
monstrates that  from  the  commencement  of 
the  fourth  century,  bishops,  synods,  and 
other  authorities  often  quote,  as  documents 
in  common  use,  a  Kaviov  aTroo-roAtKo?,  or  €k- 
KXrjo-iacrrtKos,  or  dp^ato? ;  as  was  done,  for  in- 
stance, at  the  Council  of  Nice,  by  Alexander, 
Bishop  of  Alexandria,  and  by  the  Emperor 
Constantine,  etc.2  According  to  Beveridge, 
these  quotations  make  allusion  to  the  Apos- 
tolic Canons,  and  prove  that  they  were  al- 
ready in  use  before  the  fourth  century. 

In  opposition  to  Beveridge  Dr.  von  Drey 
wrote  with  profound  learning  ; 3  and  Bickell, 
in  his  work  just  quoted,  to  a  great  degree 
accepts  his  conclusions  as  being  well-founded. 

These  conclusions  in  short  are  that  the  so- 
called  "Apostolic  Canons  "  are  a  patchwork 
taken  from  the  "Apostolic  Constitutions," 
which  are  said  to  have  been  of  Eastern  origin 
and  to  date  from  the  latter  part  of  the  third 
century,  and  from  the  canons  of  various 
synods,  notably  Nice,  Antioch,  and  Chalce- 
don. 

But  this  last  reference  to  Chalcedon  is  too 
much  for  Bickell  to  stomach ;  and  for  many 
reasons  he  makes  the  date  of  the  collection 
earlier. 

Hefele  points  out  a  rather  significant  docu- 
ment which  he  says  both  "Drey  and  Bickell 
have  overlooked.  In  1738  Scipio  Maffei  pub- 
lished three  ancient  documents,  the  first  of 
which  was  a  Latin  translation  of  a  letter 
written  on  the  subject  of  Meletius  by  the 
Egyptian  bishops  Hesychius,  Phileas,  etc. 
This  letter  was  written  during  the  persecu- 
tion of  Diocletian,  that  is,  between  303  and 
305  :  it  is  addressed  to  Meletius  himself,  and 
especially  accuses  him  of  having  ordained 
priests  in  other  dioceses.  This  conduct,  they 
tell  him,  is  contrary  to  all  ecclesiastical  rule 
(aliena  a  more  divino  et  rcgula  ecclesiastica),  and 


Q  Cf  for  catena)  Bickell,  GeschichU  des  Kirchenrechts,  S.  82. 
a  Kene  UnUrsn.chungen  iiber  die  Const,  und  Canones  der  Apos- 
tel.    Tubing.,  1832. 


THE  APOSTOLICAL  CANONS 


593 


Meletius  himself  knows  very  well  that  it  is  a 
lex  patrum  et  propatrum  .  .  .  in  alienis 
parceciis  non  licere  aliciti  episcoporum  ordina- 
tiones  celebrare.  Maffei  himself  supposes  that 
the  Egyptian  bishops  were  here  referring  to 
the  thirty-fifth  canon  (the  thirty-sixth  ac- 
cording to  the  enumeration  of  Dionysius), 
and  this  opinion  can  hardly  be  controverted." 

After  Bickell  and  Drey  about  ten  years 
passed  and  then  Bunsen  and  Ultzen  wrote  on 
the  subject.  Of  these  Bunsen  renewed  Bev- 
eridge's  arguments,  and  considers  the  "Apos- 
tolic Canons  "  as  a  reflex  of  the  customs  of  the 
Primitive  Church,  if  not  in  the  Johannean 
age,  at  latest  in  that  which  immediately  suc- 
ceeded ;  and  he  is  of  opinion  that  the  legend 
attributing  them  to  the  Apostles  is  earlier  in 
date  than  the  Council  of  Nice.  Ultzen  does 
not  express  himself  definitely  on  the  point, 
but  in  a  note  to  p.  xvj.  of  the  Preface  to  his 
book  regrets  that  Bunsen  should  have  re- 
newed Beveridge's  argument  with  regard  to 
the  relative  age  of  the  Apostolic  Canons  and 
those  of  Antioch  because  in  his  judgment 
"  all  the  more  recent  judges  of  this  matter 
had  refuted  it." 

I  think  I  should  here  interrupt  my  narra- 
tive to  warn  the  reader  that  Beveridge  has 
been  often  misunderstood  and  misrepre- 
sented. For  example  he  expressly  says  that 
according  to  his  theory 1  "  these  canons  were 
set  forth  by  various  synods,  so  too  they  seem  to 
us  to  have  been  collected  by  different  persons, 
of  whom  some  collected  more,  some  fewer. 
.  And  these  canons,  thus  collected, 
some  called  ecclesiastical  and  some  called 
them  Apostolical ;  not  that  they  believed 
them  to  have  been  written  by  the  very  Apos- 
tles, for  they  had  made  the  collection  them- 
selves, but  because  they  were  consonant  to 
the  doctrine  and  traditions  of  the  Apostles, 
and  they  were  persuaded  that  they  had  been 
originally  established  at  least  by  apostolic 
men."  This  is  Beveridge's  position  in  his 
own  words. 

I  come  now  to  the  most  recent  writings 
upon  the  subject.  Harnack  has  developed  a 
theory  which  is  partly  his  own  with  regard  to 
the  Apostolical  Constitutions,  in  his  edition  of 
the  "Didache,"  and  has  also  considered  the 
question  of  the  Apostolic  Canons.    The  fullest 

1  Bev.    Prcefatio  ad  Annotat.  in  Can.  Apost.,  §  xiii. 


discussion  however  of  the  matter  is  in  a  work 
entitled,  Die  Apostolischen  Konstitutionem,Eine 
Litteran-historische  Untersuchung,  von  Franz 
Zaver  Funk.     Rottenburg  am  NecJcar.     1891. 

Funk  gives  the  history  of  the  controversy, 
and  refuses  to  allow  that  Hefele's  citation  of 
the  Letter  of  the  Egyptian  bishops  throws 
any  light  upon  the  point.  In  most  matters 
he  agrees  with  Bickell,  and  declares  (p.  188) 
that  "the  Synod  of  Antioch  is  certainly  to  be 
regarded  as  the  source  of  the  Apostolic  Can- 
ons," and  that  thus  by  comparing  the  canons, 
it  is  manifest  that  the  Apostolic  "  are  certain- 
ly to  be  regarded  as  the  dependent  writing  " 
(p.  185).  And  after  considering  their  rela- 
tion to  the  Apostolical  Constitutions,  Funk 
states  his  conclusion  as  follows  (p.  190)  : 
"  The  drawing  up  of  the  canons  falls  there- 
fore not  earlier  than  the  interpolation  of  the 
Didaskalia  and  the  preparation  of  the  two  last 
books  of  the  Constitution,  hence  not  before 
the  beginning  of  the  fifth  century.  On  tne 
other  hand  there  is  no  ground  for  fixing  the 
writing  at  a  later  period,  not  a  single  canon 
bears  the  mark  of  a  later  time." 

Such  was  the  state  of  things  until  Mgr. 
Rihmani,  the  Syrian  Archbishop  of  Aleppo, 
gave  notice  that  he  had  found  in  a  codex  at 
Mossul  a  Syrian  version  of  the  Apocryphal 
book  known  as  the  Testamentum  Jesu  Christi. 
It  is  stated  that  in  the  discoverer's  opinion 
the  Testamentum  is  earlier  in  date  than  the 
Apostolic  Canons,  than  the  Canons  of  Hippo- 
lytus,  and  than  the  Vlllth  Book  of  the  Apos- 
tolic Constitutions  ;  and  further  that  it  was 
the  direct  source  of  the  Apostolic  Canons. 
As  I  know  nothing  further  of  this  matter,  I 
must  simply  note  it  for  the  guidance  of  the 
reader  in  his  further  study  of  the  subject. 

Having  now  traced  the  history  of  the  dis- 
cussion, I  need  only  add  that  Mr.  Turner  has 
just  issued  a  very  critical  text  of  the  version 
of  Dionysius  Exiguus,  the  full  title  of  which 
is  as  follows  : 

Ecclesise  Occidentalis  Monvmenta  Jvris 
Antiqvissima  Canonvm  et  Conciliorvm  Grae- 
corum,  Interpretationes  Latinse.  Edidit  Cvth- 
bertvs  Hamilton  Turner,  A.M.  Fascicvli 
Primi  Pars  Prior  Canones  Apostolorvm  Nicae- 
norvm  Patrvm  Svbscriptiones.  And  that  I 
have  taken,  except  where  noted  to  the  con- 
trary, Hammond's  translation. 


VOL.    XIV. 


Qq 


594 


APPENDIX 


THE    CANONS    OF    THE     HOLY    AND 
ALTOGETHER  AUGUST  APOSTLES.1 

Canon  I.2 

Let  a  bishop  be  ordained  by  Wo  or  three 
bishops. 

Canon  II. 

Let  a  presbyter,  deacon,  and  the  rest  of  the 
clergy,  be  ordained  by  one  bishop. 

Canon  III.  (III.  and  IV.) 
If  any  bishop  or  presbyter  offer  any  other 
things  at  the  altar,  besides  that  which  the 
Lord  ordained  for  the  sacrifice,  as  honey,  or 
milk,  or  strong-made  drink  instead  of  wine,3 
or  birds,  or  any  living  things,  or  vegetables, 
besides  that  which  is  ordained,  let  him  be  de- 
posed. Excepting  only  new  ears  of  corn,  and 
grapes  at  the  suitable  season.  Neither  is  it 
allowed  to  bring  anything  else  to  the  altar  at 
the  time  of  the  holy  oblation,  excepting  oil 
for  the  lamps,  and  incense. 

Canon  IV.    (V.) 

Let  all  other  fruits  be  sent  home  as  first- 
fruits  for  the  bishops  and  presbyters,  but  not 
offered  at  the  altar.  But  the  bishops  and 
presbyters  should  of  course  give  a  share  of 
these  things  to  the  deacons,  and  the  rest  of 
the  clergy. 

Canon  V.    (VI.) 

Let  not  a  bishop,  presbyter,  or  deacon, 
put  away  his  wife  under  pretence  of  religion  ; 
but  if  he  put  her  away,  let  him  be  excommu- 
nicated ;  and  if  he  persists,  let  him  be  deposed. 

Canon  VI.    (VII.) 

Let  not  a  bishop,  presbyter,  or  deacon,  un- 
dertake worldly  business ;  otherwise  let  him 
be  deposed. 

Canon  VII.     (VIII.) 

If  any  bishop,  presbyter,  or  deacon,  shall 
celebrate  the  holy  day  of  Easter  before  the 
vernal  equinox,  with  the  Jews,  let  him  be  de- 
posed. 

Canon  VIII.     (IX.) 

If  any  bishop,  presbyter,  or  deacon,  or  any 
one  on  the  sacerdotal  list,  when  the  offering 
is  made,  does  not  partake  of  it,  let  him  declare 

1  The  Latin  caption  is  "The  Ecclesiastical  Rules  of  the  Holy 
Apostles,  set  forth  by  Clement,  Pontiff  of  the  Roman  Church." 

''  The  numbering  which  I  have  followed  is  Hammond's,  but, 
where  it  differs  from  that  given  by  Hefele,  I  have  placed  Hefele's 
numbering  in  parenthesis.  With  Hefele  agree  Van  Espen  and 
Bruns  (in  his  alternative  numbering)  and  Johnson's  marginal 
numbering.  The  numbering  that  Johnson  himself  follows  is 
that  of  Cotelerius. 

>  The  text  here  varies. 


the  cause  ;  and  if  it  be  a  reasonable  one,  let 
him  be  excused ;  but  if  he  does  not  declare 
it,  let  him  be  excommunicated,  as  being  a 
cause  of  offence  to  the  people,  and  occasioning 
a  suspicion  against  the  offerer,  as  if  he  had 
not  made  the  offering  properly. 

Canon  IX.    (X.) 

All  the  faithful  who  come  in  and  hear  the 
Scriptures,  but  do  not  stay  for  the  prayers 
and  the  Holy  Communion,  are  to  be  excom- 
municated, as  causing  disorder  in  the  Church. 

Canon  X.     (XI.) 

If   any  one  shall  pray,  even  in  a  private 
[  house,  with  an  excommunicated  person,  let 
him  also  be  excommunicated. 

Canon  XL     (XII.) 

If  any  clergyman  shall  join  in  prayer  with 
a  deposed  clergyman,  as  if  he  were  a  clergy- 
man/ let  him  also  be  deposed. 

Canons  XII.  and  XIIL     (XIII.) 

If  any  one  of  the  clergy  or  laity  who  is  ex- 
communicated, or  not  to  be  received,  shall  go 
away,  and  be  received  in  another  city  without 
commendatory  letters,  let  both  the  receiver 
and  the  received  be  excommunicated. 

But  if  he  be  excommunicated  already,  let  the 
time  of  his  excommunication  be  lengthened. 

Canon  XIV. 

A  bishop  is  not  to  be  allowed  to  leave  his 
own  parish,  and  pass  over  into  another,  al- 
though he  may  be  pressed  by  many  to  do  so, 
unless  there  be  some  proper  cause  constraining 
him,  as  if  he  can  confer  some  greater  benefit 
upon  the  persons  of  that  place  in  the  word  of 
godliness.  And  this  must  be  done  not  of  his 
own  accord,  but  by  the  judgment  of  many 
bishops,  and  at  their  earnest  exhortation. 

Canon  XV. 

If  any  presbyter,  or  deacon,  or  any  other  of 
the  list  of  the  clergy,  shall  leave  his  own  par- 
ish, and  go  into  another,  and  having  entirely 
forsaken  his  own,  shall  make  his  abode  in  the 
other  parish  without  the  permission  of  his  own 
j  bishop,  we  ordain  that  he  shall  no  longer  per- 
,  form  divine  service ;   more  especially  if  his 
!  own  bishop  having  exhorted  him  to  return  he 
|  has  refused  to  do  so,  and  persists  in  his  dis- 
'  orderly  conduct.     But  let  him  communicate 
there  as  a  layman. 

*  Hammond  seems  to  have  omitted  <is  xArjpiKip,  which  I  have 
I  supplied. 


THE  APOSTOLICAL   CANONS 


595 


Canon  XVI. 

If,  however,  the  bishop,  with  whom  any 
such  persons  are  staying,  shall  disregard  the 
command  that  they  are  to  cease  from  per- 
forming divine  offices,  and  shall  receive  them 
as  clergymen,  let  him  be  excommunicated,  as 
a  teacher  of  disorder. 

Canon  XVII. 

He  who  has  been  twice  married  after  bap- 
tism, or  who  has  had  a  concubine,  cannot  be- 
come a  bishop,  presbyter,  or  deacon,  or  any 
other  of  the  sacerdotal  list. 

Canon  XVIII. 

He  who  married  a  widow,  or  a  divorced 
woman,  or  an  harlot,  or  a  servant-maid,  or  an 
actress,  cannot  be  a  bishop,  presbyter,  or  dea- 
con, or  any  other  of  the  sacerdotal  list. 

Canon  XIX. 

He  who  has  married  two  sisters,  or  a  niece, 
cannot  become  a  clergyman. 

Canon  XX. 

If  a  clergyman  becomes  surety  for  any  one, 
let  him  be  deposed. 

Canon  XXI. 
An  eunuch,  if  he  has  been  made  so  by  the 
violence  of  men  or  [if  his  virilia  have  been 
amputated 1  ]  in  times  of  persecution,  or  if  he 
has  been  born  so,  if  in  other  respects  he  is 
worthy,  may  be  made  a  bishop. 

Canon  XXII. 
He  who  has  mutilated  himself,  cannot  be- 
come a  clergyman,  for  he  is  a  self-murderer, 
and  an  enemy  to  the  workmanship  of  God. 

Canon  XXIII.     . 
If  any  man  being  a  clergyman  shall  muti- 
late himself,  let  him  be  deposed,  for  he  is  a 
self-murderer. 

Canon  XXIV. 
If  a  layman  mutilate  himself,  let  him  be 
excommunicated  for  three  years,  as  practising 
against  his  own  life. 

Canon  XXV.     (XXV.  and  XXVI.) 

If  a  bishop,  presbyter,  or  deacon  be  found 
guilty  of  fornication,  perjury,  or  theft,  let  him 
be  deposed,  but  let  him  not  be  excommuni- 
cated ;  for  the  Scripture  says,  "  thou  shalt 
not  punish  a  man  twice  for  the  same  offence." 


In  like  manner  the  other  clergy  shall  be  sub- 
ject to  the  same  proceeding.2 

Canon  XXVI.     (XXVII.) 

Of  those  who  have  been  admitted  to  the 
clergy  unmarried,  we  ordain,  that  the  readers 
and  singers  only  may,  if  they  will,  many. 

Canon  XXVII.     (XXVIII.) 

If  a  bishop,  presbyter,  or  deacon  shall  strike 
any  of  the  faithful  who  have  sinned,  or  of  the 
unbelievers  who  have  done  wrong,  with  the 
intention  of  frightening  them,  we  command 
that  he  be  deposed.  For  our  Lord  has  by  no 
means  taught  us  to  do  so,  but,  on  the  con- 
trary, when  he  was  smitten  he  smote  not 
again,  when  he  was  reviled  he  reviled  not 
again,  when  he  suffered  he  threatened  not. 

Canon  XXVIII.     (XXIX.) 

If  any  bishop,  presbyter,  or  deacon,  having 
been  justly  deposed  upon  open  accusations, 
shall  dare  to  meddle  with  any  of  the  divine 
offices  which  had  been  intrusted  to  him,  let 
him  be  altogether  cut  off  from  the  Church. 

Canon  XXIX.     (XXX.) 

If  any  bishop,  presbyter,  or  deacon,  shall 
obtain  possession  of  that  dignity  by  money, 
let  both  him  and  the  person  who  ordained 
him  be  deposed,  and  also  altogether  cut  off 
from  all  communion,  as  Simon  Magus  was  by 
me  Peter. 

Canon  XXX.     (XXXI.) 

If  any  bishop  obtain  possession  of  a  church 
by  the  aid  of  the  temporal  powers,  let  him  be 
deposed  and  excommunicated,  and  all  who 
communicate  with  him. 

Canon  XXXI.     (XXXII.) 

If  any  presbyter,  despising  his  own  bishop, 
shall  collect  a  separate  congregation,  and 
erect  another  altar,  not  having  any  grounds 
for  condemning  the  bishop  with  regard  to  re- 
ligion or  justice,  let  him  be  deposed  for  his 
ambition  ;  for  he  is  a  tyrant ;  in  like  manner 
also  the  rest  of  the  clergy,  and  as  many  as 
join  him  ;  and  let  laymen  be  excommunicated. 
Let  this,  however,  be  done  after  a  first,  sec- 
ond, and  third  admonition  from  the  bishop. 

Canon  XXXII.     (XXXIII.) 

If  any  presbyter  or  deacon  has  been  excom- 
municated by  a  bishop,  he  may  not  be  received 


1  Hammond  has  omitted  these  words. 


2 1  have  changed  Hammond's  rendering  of  this  last  phrase,  "in. 
like  manner  with  respect  to  the  other  clergy." 


Q  q  2 


596 


APPENDIX 


into  communion  again  by  any  other  than  by 
him  who  excommunicated  him,  unless  it  hap- 
pen that  the  bishop  who  excommunicated  him 
be  dead. 

Canon  XXXIII.     (XXXIV.) 

No  foreign  bishop,  presbyter,  or  deacon, 
may  be  received  without  commendatory  let- 
ters; and  when  they  are  produced  let  the 
persons  be  examined ;  and  if  they  be 
preachers  of  godliness,  let  them  be  received. 
Otherwise,  although  you  supply  them  with 
what  they  need,  you  must  not  receive  them 
into  communion,  for  many  things  are  done 
surreptitiously. 

Canon  XXXIV.     (XXXV.) 

The  bishops  of  every  nation  must  acknowl- 
edge him  who  is  first  among  them  and  ac- 
count him  as  their  head,  and  do  nothing  of 
consequence  without  his  consent ;  but  each 
may  do  those  things  only  which  concern  his 
own  parish,  and  the  country  places  which  be- 
long to  it.  But  neither  let  him  (who  is  the 
first)  do  anything  without  the  consent  of  all ; 
for  so  there  will  be  unanimity,  and  God  will 
be  glorified  through  the  Lord  in  the  Holy 
Spirit.1 

Canon  XXXV.     (XXXVI.) 

Let  not  a  bishop  dare  to  ordain  beyond  his 
own  limits,  in  cities  and  places  not  subject  to 
him.  But  if  he  be  convicted  of  doing  so, 
without  the  consent  of  those  persons  who 
have  authority  over  such  cities  and  places,  let 
him  be  deposed,  and  those  also  whom  he  has 
ordained. 

Canon  XXXVI.     (XXXVII.) 

If  any  person,  having  been  ordained  bishop, 
does  not  undertake  the  ministry,  and  the 
care  of  the  people  committed  to  him,  let  him 
be  excommunicated  until  he  does  undertake 
it.  In  like  manner  a  presbyter  or  deacon. 
But  if  he  has  gone  and  has  not  been  received, 
not  of  his  own  will  but  from  the  perverseness 
of  the  people,  let  him  continue  bishop  ;  and 
let  the  clergy  of  the  city  be  excommunicated, 
because  they  have  not  corrected  the  disobedi- 
ent people. 

Canon  XXXVII.     (XXXVIII.) 

Let  thei"e  be  a  meeting  of  the  bishops  twice 
a  year,  and  let  them  examine  amongst  them- 
selves the  decrees  concerning   religion   and 

1  The  text  here  differs  ;  I  follow  Beveridge.  Hammond  reads, 
' '  Through  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  Father  through  the  Lord 
by  the  Holy  Spirit,  even  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy 
Spirit," 


settle  the  ecclesiastical  controversies  which 
may  have  occurred.  One  meeting  to  be  held 
in  the  fourth  week  of  Pentecost  [i.e.,  the  fourth 
week  after  Easter],  and  the  other  on  the  12th 
day  of  the  month  Hyperberetseus  [i.e.,  Oc- 
tober]. 

Canon  XXXVIII.     (XXXIX.) 

Let  the  bishop  have  the  care  of  all  the 
goods  of  the  Church,  and  let  him  administer 
them  as  under  the  inspection  of  God.  But 
he  must  not  alienate  any  of  them  or  give  the 
things  which  belong  to  God  to  his  own  rela- 
tions. If  they  be  poor  let  him  relieve  them 
as  poor ;  but  let  him  not,  under  that  pre- 
tence, sell  the  goods  of  the  Church. 

Canon  XXXIX.     (XL.) 

Let  not  the  presbyters  or  deacons  do  any- 
thing without  the  sanction  of  the  bishop  ;  for 
he  it  is  who  is  intrusted  with  the  people  of 
the  Lord,  and  of  whom  will  be  required  the 
account  of  their  souls. 

Canon  XL.     (XL.  continued.) 

Let  the  private  goods  of  the  bishop,  if  he 
have  any  such,  and  those  of  the  Lord,  be 
clearly  distinguished,  that  the  bishop  may 
have  the  power  of  leaving  his  own  goods,  when 
he  dies,  to  whom  he  will,  and  how  he  will, 
and  that  the  bishop's  own  property  may  not 
be  lost  under  pretence  of  its  being  the 
property  of  the  Church  :  for  it  may  be  that 
he  has  a  wife,  or  children,  or  relations,  or 
servants  ;  and  it  is  just  before  God  and  man, 
that  neither  should  the  Church  suffer  any 
loss  through  ignorance  of  the  bishop's  own 
property,  nor  the  bishop  or  his  relations  be 
injured  under  pretext  of  the  Church  :  nor 
that  those  who  belong  to  him  should  be  in- 
volved in  contests,  and  cast  reproaches  upon 
his  death. 

Canon  XLI. 

We  ordain  that  the  bishop  have  authority 
;  over  the  goods  of  the  Church :  for  if  he  is  to 
I  be  intrusted  with  the  pi-ecious  souls  of  men, 
much  more  are  temporal  possessions  to  be 
intmsted  to  him.  He  is  therefore  to  admin- 
ister them  all  of  his  own  authority,  and  sup- 
ply those  who  need,  through  the  presbyters 
and  deacons,  in  the  fear  of  God,  and  with  all 
reverence.  He  may  also,  if  need  be,  take 
what  is  required  for  his  own  necessary  wants, 
and  for  the  brethren  to  whom  he  has  to  show 
hospitality,  so  that  he  may  not  be  in  any 
want.  For  the  law  of  God  has  ordained,  that 
they  who  wait  at  the  altar  should  be  nour- 


THE  APOSTOLICAL   CANONS 


597 


ished  of  the  altar.     Neither  does  any  soldier 
bear  arms  against  an  enemy  at  his  own  cost. 

Canon  XLII. 

If  a  bishop  or  presbyter,  or  deacon,  is  ad- 
dicted to  dice  or  drinking,  let  him  either  give 
it  over,  or  be  deposed. 

Canon  XLIII. 

If  a  subdeacon,  reader,  or  singer,  commits 
the  same  things,  let  him  either  give  over,  or 
be  excommunicated.     So  also  laymen. 

Canon  XLIV. 

Let  a  bishop,  pi'esbyter,  or  deacon,  who 
takes  usury  from  those  who  borrow  of  him, 
give  up  doing  so,  or  be  deposed. 

Canon  XLV. 
Let  a  bishop,  presbyter,  or  deacon,  who  has 
only  prayed  with  heretics,  be  excommunicat- 
ed :  but  if  he  has  permitted  them  to  perform 
any  clerical  office,  let  him  be  deposed. 

Canon  XLVI. 
We  ordain  that  a  bishop,  or  presbyter, 
who  has  admitted  the  baptism  or  sacrifice  of 
heretics,  be  deposed.  For  what  concord  hath 
Christ  with  Belial,  or  what  part  hath  a  believ- 
er with  an  infidel  ? 

Canon  XLVII. 
Let  a  bishop  or  presbyter  who  shall  baptize 
again  one  who  has  rightly  received  baptism, 
or  who  shall  not  baptize  one  who  has  been 
polluted  by  the  ungodly,  be  deposed,  as  de- 
spising the  cross  and  death  of  the  Lord,  and 
not  making  a  distinction  between  the  true 
priests  and  the  false. 

Canon   XLVIII. 

If  any  layman  put  away  his  wife  and  marry 
another,  or  one  who  has  been  divorced  by 
another  man,  let  him  be  excommunicated. 

Canon  XLIX. 
If  any  bishop  or  presbyter,  contrary  to  the 
ordinance  of  the  Lord,  does  not  baptize  into 
the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  but 
into  three  Unoriginated  Beings,  or  three  Sons,  | 
or  three  Comforters,  let  him  be  deposed. 

Canon  L. 
If   any  bishop  or  presbyter  does  not  per- 
form  the   one  initiation  with  three   immer- 
sions, but  with  giving  one   immersion   only, 
into  the  death   of  the  Lord,  let  him  be  de-  j 


posed.  For  the  Lord  said  not,  Baptize  into 
my  death,  but,  "Go,  make  disciples  of  all 
nations,  baptizing  them  in  the  name  of  the 
Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy 
Ghost." 

Canon  LI. 
If  any  bishop,  presbyter,  or  deacon,  or  any 
one  of  the  sacerdotal  list,  abstains  from  mar- 
riage, or  flesh,  or  wine,  not  by  way  of  religious 
restraint,  but  as  abhorring  them,  forgetting 
that  God  made  all  things  very  good,  and  that 
he  made  man  male  and  female,  and  blasphem- 
ing the  work  of  creation,  let  him  be  corrected, 
or  else  be  deposed,  and  cast  out  of  the  Church. 
In  like  manner  a  layman. 

Canon  LII. 
If  any  bishop  or  presbyter,1  does  not  receive 
him  who  turns  away  from  his  sin,  but  rejects 
him,  let  him  be  deposed ;  for  he  grieveth 
Christ  who  said,  "  There  is  joy  in  heaven  over 
one  sinner  that  repenteth." 

Canon  LIII. 
If  any  bishop,  presbyter,  or  deacon,  does 
not  on  festival  days  partake  of  flesh  and  wine, 
from  an  abhorrence  of  them,  and  not  out  of 
religious  restraint,  let  him  be  deposed,  as  be- 
ing seared  in  his  own  conscience,  and  being 
the  cause  of  offence  to  many. 

Canon  LIV. 
If  any  of  the  clergy  be  found  eating  in  a 
tavern,  let  him  be  excommunicated,  unless  he 
has  been  constrained  by  necessity,  on  a  jour- 
ney, to  lodge  in  an  inn. 

Canon  LV. 
If  any  of  the  clergy  insult  the  bishop,  let 
him  be  deposed  :  for  "  thou  shalt  not  speak 
evil  of  the  ruler  of  thy  people." 

Canon  LVI. 
If  any  of  the  clergy  insult  a  presbyter,  or 
deacon,  let  him  be  excommunicated. 

Canon  LVII. 
If  any  of  the  clergy  mock  the  lame,  or  the 
deaf,  or  the  blind,  or  him  who  is  infirm  in  his 
legs,  let  him   be  excommunicated.     In   like 
manner  any  of  the  laity. 

Canon  LVIII. 
If  any  bishop  or  presbyter   neglects  the 
clergy  or  the  people,  and  does  not  instruct 
them  in  the  way  of  godliness,  let  him  be  ex- 

i  Hammond  adds  "  or  deacon." 


598 


APPENDIX 


communicated,  and  if  he  persists  in  his  negli- 
gence and  idleness,  let  him  be  deposed. 

Canon  LIX. 

If  any  bishop,  presbyter,  or  deacon,  when 
any  of  the  clergy  is  in  want,  does  not  supply 
him  with  what  he  needs,  let  him  be  excom- 
municated ;  but  if  he  persists,  let  him  be  de- 
posed, as  one  who  has  killed  his  brother. 

Canon  LX. 

If  any  one  reads  publicly  in  the  church  the 
falsely  inscribed '  books  of  impious  men,  as  if 
they  were  holy  Scripture,  to  the  destruction 
of  the  people  and  clergy,  let  him  be  deposed. 

Canon  LXI. 

If  any  accusation  be  brought  against  a  be- 
liever of  fornication  or  adultery,  or  any  for- 
bidden action,  and  he  be  convicted,  let  him 
not  be  promoted  to  the  clergy. 

Canon  LXII. 

If  any  of  the  clergy,  through  fear  of  men, 
whether  Jew,  heathen,  or  heretic,  shall  deny 
the  name  of  Christ,  let  him  be  cast  out.  If 
he  deny  the  name  of  a  clergyman,  let  him  be 
deposed.  If  he  repent,  let  him  be  received  as 
a  layman. 

Canon  LXIII. 

If  any  bishop,  presbyter,  or  deacon,  or  any 
one  of  the  sacerdotal  order,  shall  eat  flesh 
with  the  blood  of  the  life  thereof,  or  anything 
killed  by  beasts,  or  that  dies  of  itself,  let  him 
be  deposed.  For  the  law  has  forbidden  this. 
If  he  be  a  layman,  let  him  be  excommuni- 
cated. 

Canon  LXIV. 

If  any  clergyman  or  layman  shall  enter 
into  a  synagogue  of  Jews  or  heretics  to  pray, 
let  the  former  be  deposed  and  let  the  latter 
be  excommunicated.2 

Canon  LXV. 

If  any  clergyman  shall  strike  anyone  in  a 
contest,  and  kill  him  with  one  blow,  let  him 
be  deposed  for  his  violence.  If  a  layman  do 
so,  let  him  be  excommunicated. 

Canon  LXVI. 

If  any  of  the  clergy  be  found  fasting  on 
the  Lord's  day,  or  on  the  Sabbath,3  excepting 


1  Hammond  translates  "  bearing  false  inscriptions,"  the  Greek 

is  i/<ei>5e7uypa(/)GE. 

2  Hammond  translates  differently  with  the  same  meaning. 

3  Hammond  substitutes  "  any  Saturday,"  and  omits  the  word 
"  only." 


the  one  only,  let  him  be  deposed.     If  a  lay- 
man, let  him  be  excommunicated. 

Canon  LXVII. 

If  anyone  shall  force  and  keep  a  virgin  not 
espoused,  let  him  be  excommunicated.  And 
he  may  not  take  any  other,  but  must  retain 
her  whom  he  has  chosen,  though  she  be  a 
poor  person. 

Canon  LXVIII. 

If  any  bishop,  pi'esbyter,  or  deacon,  shall 
receive  from  anyone  a  second  ordination,  let 
both  the  ordained  and  the  ordainer  be  de- 
posed ;  unless  indeed  it  be  proved  that  he 
had  his  ordination  from  heretics ;  for  those 
who  have  been  baptized  or  ordained  by  such 
persons  'cannot  be  either  of  the  faithful  or  of 
the  clergy. 

Canon  LXIX. 

If  any  bishop,  presbyter,  or  deacon,  or 
reader,  or  singer,  does  not  fast  the  holy 
Quadragesimal  fast  of  Easter,  or  the  fourth 
day,  or  the  day  of  Preparation,  let  him  be 
deposed,  unless  he  be  hindered  by  some 
bodily  infirmity.  If  he  be  a  layman,  let  him 
be  excommunicated. 

Canon  LXX. 

If  any  bishop,  presbyter,  or  deacon,  or  any 
one  of  the  list  of  clergy,  keeps  fast  or  festival 
with  the  Jews,  or  receives  from  them  any  of 
the  gifts  of  their  feasts,  as  unleavened  bread, 
or  any  such  things,  let  him  be  deposed.  If 
he  be  a  layman,  let  him  be  excommunicated. 

Canon  LXXI. 

If  any  Christian  brings  oil  into  a  temple  of 
the  heathen  or  into  a  synagogue  of  the  Jews 
at  their  feast,  or  lights  lamps,  let  him  be 
excommunicated. 

Canon  LXXII. 

If  any  clergyman  or  layman  takes  away  wax 
or  oil  from  the  holy  Church,  let  him  be  ex- 
communicated, [and  let  him  restore  a  fifth 
part  more  than  he  took.]  4 

Canon  LXXIII. 

Let  no  one  convert  to  his  own  use  any 
vessel  of  gold  or  silver,  or  any  veil  which  has 
been  sanctified,  for  it  is  contrary  to  law  ;  and 
if  anyone  be  detected  doing  so,  let  him  be 
excommunicated. 

4  This  last  phrase  is  omitted  by  Hammond,  but  is  found  in  the 
Latin  and  in  some  of  the  Greek  texts. 


THE  APOSTOLICAL   CANONS 


599 


Canon  LXXIV. 

If  any  bishop  has  been  accused  of  anything 
by  men  worthy  of  credit,  he  must  be  sum- 
moned by  the  bishops  ;  and  if  he  appears, 
and  confesses,  or  is  convicted,  a  suitable 
punishment  must  be  inflicted  upon  him. 
But  if  when  he  is  summoned  he  does  not 
attend,  let  him  be  summoned  a  second  time, 
two  bishops  being  sent  to  him,  for  that  pur- 
pose. [If  even  then  he  will  not  attend,  let 
him  be  summoned  a  third  time,  two  bishops 
being  again  sent  to  him.1]  But  if  even  then 
he  shall  disregard  the  summons  and  not 
come,  let  the  synod  pronounce  such  sentence 
against  him  as  appears  right,  that  he  may  not 
seem  to  profit  by  avoiding  judgment. 

Canon  LXXV. 

An  heretic  is  not  to  be  received  as  witness 
against  a  bishop,  neither  only  one  believer ; 
for,  "in  the  mouth  of  two  or  three  witnesses, 
every  word  shall  be  established." 

Canon  LXXVI. 

A  bishop  must  not  out  of  favour  to  a 
brother  or  a  son,  or  any  other  relation,  ordain 
whom  he  will  to  the  episcopal  dignity ;  for  it 
is  not  right  to  make  heirs  of  the  bishopric, 
giving  the  things  of  God  to  human  affections. 
Neither  is  it  fitting  to  subject  the  Church  of 
God  to  heirs.  But  if  anyone  shall  do  so  let 
the  ordination  be  void,  and  the  ordainer  him- 
self be  punished  with  excommunication. 

Canon  LXXVII. 

If  any  one  be  deprived  of  an  eye,  or  lame 
of  a  leg,  but  in  other  respects  be  worthy  of  a 
bishopric,  he  may  be  ordained,  for  the  defect 
of  the  body  does  not  defile  a  man,  but  the 
pollution  of  the  soul. 

Canon  LXXVIII. 

But  if  a  man  be  deaf  or  blind,  he  may  not 
be  made  a  bishop,  not  indeed  as  if  he  were 
thus  defiled,  but  that  the  affairs  of  the  Church 
may  not  be  hindered. 

Canon  LXXIX. 

If  anyone  has  a  devil,  let  him  not  be  made 
a  clergyman,  neither  let  him  pray  with  the 
faithful ;  but  if  he  be  freed,  let  him  be  re- 
ceived into  communion,  and  if  he  is  worthy  he 
may  be  ordained. 


1  According  to  Hefele,  these  words  are  only  in  the  Latin,  but 
they  are  in  the  Greek  text  of  Beveridge. 


Canon  LXXX. 

It  is  not  allowed  that  a  man  who  has  come 
over  from  an  heathen  life,  and  been  baptized 
or  who  has  been  converted  from  an  evil 
course  of  living,  should  be  immediately  made 
a  bishop,  for  it  is  not  right  that  he  who  has 
not  been  tried  himself  should  be  a  teacher  of 
others.  Unless  indeed  this  be  done  upon  a 
special  manifestation  of  Divine  grace  in  his 
favour. 

Canon  LXXXI. 

We  have  said  that  a  bishop  or  presbyter 
must  not  give  himself  to  the  management  of 
public  affairs,  but  devote  himself  to  ecclesias- 
tical business.  Let  him  then  be  persuaded 
to  do  so,  or  let  him  be  deposed,  for  no  man 
can  serve  two  masters,  according  to  the  Lord's 
declaration. 

Canon  LXXXII. 

We  do  not  allow  any  servants  to  be  pro- 
moted to  the  clergy  without  the  consent  of 
their  masters,  [to  the  troubling  of  their 
houses. 2]  But  if  any  servant  should  appear 
worthy  of  receiving  an  order,3  as  our  Onesi- 
mus  appeared,  and  his  masters  agree  and 
liberate  him,  and  send  him  out  of  their  house, 
he  may  be  ordained. 

Canon  LXXXIII. 

If  a  bishop,  presbyter,  or  deacon,  shall 
serve  in  the  army,  and  wish  to  retain  both 
the  Roman  magistracy  and  the  priestly  office, 
let  him  be  deposed  ;  for  the  things  of  Csesar 
belong  to  Caesar,  and  those  of  God  to  God. 

Canon  LXXXIY. 

Whosoever  shall  insult  the  King,  or  a  ruler, 
contrary  to  what  is  right,  let  him  suffer  pun- 
ishment. If  he  be  a  clergyman,  let  him  be 
deposed  ;  if  a  layman,  excommunicated. 

Canon  LXXXV. 

Let  the  following  books  be  counted  vener- 
able and  sacred  by  all  of  you,  both  clergy 
and  Laity.  Of  the  Old  Testament,  five  books 
of  Moses,  Genesis,  Exodus,  Leviticus,  Num- 
bers, Deuteronomy ;  of  Joshua  the  Son  of 
Nun,  one  ;  of  the  Judges,  one  ;  of  Ruth,  one ; 
of  the  Kings,  four  ;  of  the  Chronicles  of  the 
book  of  the  days,  two  ;  of  Ezra,  two ;  of  Esther, 
one;  [some  texts  read  "of  Judith,  one";] 
of  the  Maccabees,  three  ;  of  Job,  one  ;  of  the 
Psalter,  one  ;  of  Solomon,  three,  viz. :    Prov- 


2  According  to  Hefele  this  is  only  in  the  Latin,  but  it  is  found 
in  the  Greek  of  Beveridge. 
3 1  have  changed  Hammond's  translation  here. 


600 


APPENDIX 


erbs,  Ecclesiastes,  and  the  Song  of  Songs  ; 
of  the  Prophets,  twelve ;  of  Isaiah,  one  ;  of 
Jeremiah,  one  ;  of  Ezekiel,  one  ;  of  Daniel, 
one.  But  besides  these  you  are  recommended 
to  teach  your  young  persons  the  Wisdom  of 
the  very  learned  Sirach.  Our  own  books, 
that  is,  those  of  the  New  Testament,  are  : 
the  four  Gospels  of  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and 


John  ;  fourteen  Epistles  of  Paul  ;  two  Epis- 
tles of  Peter  ;  three  of  John  ;  one  of  James, 
and  one  of  Jude.  Two  Epistles  of  Clemens, 
and  the  Constitutions  of  me  Clemens,  ad- 
dressed to  you  Bishops,  in  eight  books,  which 
are  not  to  be  published  to  all  on  account  of 
the  mystical  things  in  them.  And  the  Acts 
of  us  the  Apostles.1 


THE  LETTER  OF  THE  BLESSED  DIONYSIUS,  THE  ARCHBISHOP  OF  ALEXAN- 
DRIA TO  BASILIDES  THE  BISHOP,  WHO  MADE  ENQUIRIES  ON  VARIOUS 
SUBJECTS,  TO  WHICH  DIONYSIUS  MADE  ANSWER  IN  THIS  EPISTLE, 
WHICH  ANSWERS  HAVE  BEEN  RECEIVED  AS  CANONS.2 


Dionysius  to  my  beloved  son,  and  brother, 
and  fellow  minister  in  holy  things,  Basilides 
faithful  to  God,  salutation  in  the  Lord. 

NOTE. 

Dionysius,  Johnson  says,  wrote  in  about 
a.d.  247. 

Canon  I.3 

When  the  Paschal  fast  is  to  be  broken  de- 
pends on  the  precise  hour  of  our  Saviour's 
resm-rection,  and  this  was  not  certainly  to  be 
known  from  the  Four  Evangelists  ;  therefore 
they  who  have  not  fasted  the  Monday,  Tues- 
day, Wednesday,  and  Thursday  before  Easter, 
do  no  great  thing  if  they  fast  the  Friday  and 
Saturday,  and  so  till  past  three  on  Easter 
morning.  But  they  who  have  fasted  the 
whole  six  days,  are  not  to  be  blamed  if  they 
break  their  fast  after  midnight.  Some  do  not 
fast  any  of  these  days. 

Canon  II. 

Menstruous  women  ought  not  to  come  to 
the  Holy  Table,  or  touch  the  Holy  of  Holies,4 
nor  to  churches,  but  pray  elsewhere. 

NOTE. 

Balsamon  notes  how  the  canon  educes  the 
example  of  the  woman  who  had  had  an  issue 
of  blood  for  twelve  years  and  who  therefore 
did  not  dare  to  touch  the  Lord,  but  only  the 
"hem  of  his  garment."     He  also  notes  that 

1  The  text  of  this  canon  is  quite  different  in  the  different 
codices  and  versions.    I  have  departed  from  Hammond's  version. 

5  I  have  followed  in  the  captions  to  all  these  non-conciliar  can- 
ons the  Greek  text  of  Beveridge  in  his  Synndicon  (Tom.  II.). 

3 1  have  here  placed  Johnson's  epitome  of  these  canons  ;  the 
Ancient  Epitome  is  lacking. 

4  In  the  Greek  "  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ." 


the  question  proposed,  was  whether  Chris- 
tian women  should  be  excluded  from  the 
church  and  need  follow  the  example  of  the 
Hebrews,  who  "  when  the  menstrual  flux  was 
upon  them,  sat  in  a  solitary  place  by  them- 
selves and  waited  for  seven  days  to  pass,  and 
their  flux  should  be  over."  The  answer 
given  is  as  above. 

Canon  III. 

They  that  can  contain  and  are  aged  ought 
to  judge  for  themselves.  They  have  heard  St. 
Paul  say;  that  they  should  "for  a  time  give 
themselves  to  prayer,  and  then  come  together 
again." 

note. 

In  this  epitome  Johnson  has  set  forth  the 
meaning  of  the  canon,  as  understood  by  the 
Greek  scholiasts,  rather  than  translated  and 
epitomized  the  canon  itself. 

Canon  IV. 

They  who  have  had  involuntary  nocturnal 
pollutions  be  at  their  own  discretion  [whether 
to  communicate  or  not]. 

NOTE. 

The  Saint  ends  this  canon  with  these 
words  :  "  I  have  given  opinion  on  the  points 
about  which  you  have  consulted  me,  not  as  a 
doctor,  but  in  all  simplicity  as  it  is  suitable  the 
relation  between  us  should  be.  And  when  you 
have  examined,  my  most  learned  son,  what  I 
have  written  you  will  let  me  know  what  seems 
to  you  better  or  whether  you  agree  with  my 
opinions.  Farewell,  dear  son,  may  your  min- 
istry be  in  the  peace  of  the  Lord." 


CANONS  OF  PETER  OF  ALEXANDRIA 


601 


II. 

THE    CANONS    OF    THE    BLESSED    PETER,   ARCHBISHOP    OF    ALEXANDRIA, 
AND  MARTYR,1  WHICH  ARE  FOUND  IN  HIS  SERMON  ON  PENITENCE. 


Canon  I. 

The  fourth  Easter  from  the  beginning  of 
the  persecution  was  now  come ;  and  orders, 
that  they  who  did  not  fall  till  after  they  had 
endured  severe  torments,  and  have  already 
been  "Mourners"  three  years,  after  forty 
days'  fast,  are  to  be  admitted  to  communion, 
although  they  have  not  been  before  received 
[to  penance].* 

Canon  II. 

But  if  they  endured  imprisonment  only, 
without  torments,  let  a  year  be  added  to  their 
former  penance. 

Canon  III. 

If  they  fell  voluntarily,  without  torments 
or  imprisonments,  but  are  come  to  repent- 
ance, four  years  are  added  to  their  former 
penance. 

Canon  IV. 

The  case  of  them  who  do  not  repent  pro- 
nounced desperate. 

Canon  V. 

They  that  used  evasion,  and  did  not  right 
down  subscribe  the  abnegation,  or  with  their 


Christians,  and  endured  torments,  are  forth- 
with admitted  to  communion. 

Canon  IX. 

That  they  who  provoked  the  magistrates  to 
persecute  themselves  and  others  are  to  be 
blamed,  yet  not  to  be  denied  communion. 

Canon  X. 

That  clergymen,  who  run  themselves  into 
persecution,  and  fell,  though  they  did  after- 
ward recover  themselves,  and  suffer  torments, 
yet  are  not  to  be  admitted  to  perform  the 
sacred  offices. 

Canon  XI. 

That  they  who  prayed  for  them  who  fell 
after  long  torments,  be  connived  at,  and  we 
pray  together  with  them,  since  they  lament 
for  what  they  have  done,  with  anguish  and 
mortification.3 

Canon  XII. 

That  they  who  with  money  purchased  their 
ease  and  freedom,  are  to  be  commended. 

Canon  XIII. 
Nor  should  we  accuse  those  who  ran  away, 


own   hands    incense    the  idols,    but   sent   a  I  anfl  left  all,  though  others  left  behind  might 
heathen  to  do  it  for  them,  are  enjoined  six  I  fare  y^  Worse  for  it.4 
months'  penance,  though  they  have  been  par- 
doned by  some  of  the  Confessors. 


Canon  VI. 

Slaves  forced  by  their  masters  to  incense 
idols,  and  doing  it  in  their  master's  stead,  are 
enjoined  a  year's  penance. 

Canon  VII. 

The  masters  who  forced  them  to  it,  are  en- 
joined three  years'  penance,  as  being  hypo- 
crites, and  as  forcing  their  slaves  to  sacrifice. 

Canon  VIII. 

They  who  first  fell,  and  afterwards  recov- 
ered  themselves,   by  professing    themselves 

1  According  to  Johnson,  St.  Peter  of  Alexandria  was  martyred 
a.d.  311  in  the  persecution  in  the  time  of  Diocletian,  carried  oh  by 
Maximian. 

2  In  Beveridge  will  be  found  Balsamon's  and  Zonaras's  notes. 


Canon  XIV. 

That  they  who  endured  tortures,  and  after- 
wards, when  they  were  deprived  of  speech 
and  motion,  had  their  hands  forced  into  the 
fire,  to  offer  unholy  sacrifice,  be  placed  in  the 
Liturgy  [i.e.,  in  the  diptychs]  among  the  Con- 
fessors. 

Canon  XV. 

Wednesday  is  to  be  fasted,  because  then 
the  Jews  conspired  to  betray  Jesus  ;  Friday, 
because  he  then  suffered  for  us.  We  keep 
the  Lord's  Day  as  a  day  of  joy,  because  then 
our  Lord  rose.  Our  tradition  is,  not  to  kneel 
on  that  day. 


3  Johnson  remarks,  "The  truth  is,  there  is  occasion  for  a  critic, 
for  the  Greek  is  certainly  corrupted." 

4  This  canon  contains  the  legend,  refuted  by  St.  Jerome,  that  St. 
John  the  Baptist  was  taken  by  St.  Elizabeth  away  from  the  dan- 
ger of  Herod's  edicts  against  the  Innocents  and  escaped  by 
night,  his  father,  Zacharias,  the  meanwhile  being  slain  between 
the  temple  and  the  altar. 


602 


APPENDIX 


III. 

THE  CANONICAL  EPISTLE  OF  ST.  GREGORY,  ARCHBISHOP  OF  NEOC^S- 
AREA,  WHO  IS  CALLED  THAUMATURGUS,  CONCERNING  THEM  THAT, 
DURING  THE  INCURSION  OF  THE  BARBARIANS,  ATE  OF  THINGS  OF- 
FERED TO  IDOLS  AND  COMMITTED  CERTAIN  OTHER  SINS.1 


Canon  I. 

That  they  who  have  been  taken  captives  by 
the  barbarians,  and  have  eaten  -with  them,  be 
not  treated  as  persons  that  have  eaten  things 
offered  to  idols  ;  especially  because  it  is  uni- 
versally reported,  that  they  do  not  sacrifice  to 
idols  ;  nor  shall  those  women  who  have  been 
ravished  by  them,  be  treated  as  guilty  of  for- 
nication, unless  they  were  before  of  lewd 
lives. 

Canon  II. 

That  those  Christians  who  plundered  their 
brethren  during  the  invasion,  be  excommu- 
nicated, lest  wrath  come  on  the  people,  and 
especially  on  the  presidents,2  who  enquire 
not  into  these  matters. 


Canons  III.,  IV.,  V. 

The  pretence  of  having  found  those  goods, 
or  that  they  themselves  lost  things  of  equal 
value,  shall  stand  them  in  no  stead,  but  that 
they  be  excluded  from  prayer.3 

Canon  VI. 

Against  those  who  detain  them  prisoners 
who  had  escaped  from  the  barbarians,  the 
holy  man  '  expects  that  such  should  be  thun- 
der-struck, and  therefore  desires  that  some 
enquiry  be  made  upon  the  spot  by  persons 
sent  for  this  purpose. 


Canon  VII. 

That  they  who  joined  the  barbarians  in 
their  murder  and  ravages,  or  were  guides  or 
informers  to  them,  be  not  permitted  to  be 
hearers,  till  holy  men  assembled  together 
do  agree  in  common  upon  what  shall  seem 
good,  first  to  the  Holy  Ghost,  then  to  them- 
selves. 

Canon  VIII. 

But  if  they  discover  themselves,  and  make 
restitution,  they  shall  be  admitted  to  be 
Prostrators. 

Canon  IX. 

They  that  are  convicted  to  have  found 
(though  in  their  own  houses)  anything  [of 
their  neighbours']  left  by  the  barbarians 
shall  also  be  Prostrators  ;  but  if  they  shall 
confess  themselves  they  shall  communicate  in 
prayer. 

Canon  X. 

This  last  privilege  is  restrained  to  such  as 
demand  nothing  as  a  reward  for  their  discov- 
ery, and  salvage,  or  under  any  pretence  what- 
soever. 

Canon  XL 

The  station  of  Mourners  is  without  the  gate 
of  the  oratory  ;  the  station  of  the  Hearers  is 
within  the  oratory,  in  the  porch  with  the  cate- 
chumens ;  the  station  of  Prostrators  is  within 
the  door  of  the  temple  ;  the  station  of  Co- 
standers  is  among  the  communicants ;  the 
last  is  the  participation  of  Holy  Mysteries.5 


IV. 


THE  EPISTLE   OF  ST.  ATHANASIUS  TO  THE  MONK  AMMUS.6 


(Hai/Ta  fxkv  KaAa,  k.  t.  A.) 

(Tliis,  as  Epistle  XLVIII,  will  be  found  trans-    the  Saint. 
lated  in  Vol.  IV.  of  the  Nicene  and  Post-Ni- 
cene  Fathers  {2d  Series)  p.  556  et  seq.) 

Involuntary   nocturnal  pollutions  are  not 
sinful,  [I  add  to  Johnson  the  exact  words  of 


For  what  sin  or  uncleanness  can 
any  natural  excrement  have  in  itself?  Think  of 
the  absurdity  of  making  a  sin  of  the  wax  which 
comes  from  the  ears  or  of  the  spittle  from  the 
mouth.  Moreover  we  might  add  many  things 
and  explain   how   the   excretions    from    the 


1  Johnson  says  this  was  about  the  year  of  grace  240,  after  the 
Goths  had  ravaged  Asia,  during  the  reign  of  Galienus.  The 
letter,  he  thinks,  was  an  Encyclical  sent  to  every  bishop  of  his 
province,  by  Euphrosynus.  who  was  one  of  these  bishops  and 
whom  he  calls  his  "  old  friend."  In  the  beginning  of  the  letter 
he  addresses  each  one  of  the  bishops  as  "  most  holy  pope." 

5  I.e.,  The  bishops,  cf.  St.  Justin  Martyr,  Tertullian,  etc. 


3  Literally  "  abdicate  from  Prayers."    Johnson  explains  this  to 
mean  that  they  became  Prostrators. 

4  I.e..  St.  Gregory. 

6  Johnson  has  a  note  that  this  cauon  is  not  "St.  Gregory's  but 
an  addition  by  some  other  hand." 
6  In  English  translation  named  Amnn. 


THE   CANONS   OF  ATHANASIUS 


603 


belly  are  necessary  to  animal  life.  But  if  we 
believe  that  man  is  the  work  of  God's  hand, 
as  we  are  taught  in  holy  Scripture,  how  can  it 
be  supposed  necessary  that  we  perform  any- 
thing impure  ?  And  if  we  are  the  children  of 
God,  as  the  holy  Acts  of  the  Apostles  teaches, 
we  have  in  us  nothing  unclean,  etc.,  etc."]  ; 
nor  is  matrimony  unclean,  though  virginity 
["which  is  angelic  and  than  which  nothing- 
can  be  more  excellent "]  is  to  be  preferred 
before  it. 


THE  EPISTLE  OF  THE  SAME  ATHA- 
NASIUS TAKEN  FEOM  THE  XXXIX. 
FESTAL  EPISTLE. 

{Found  translated  in  Vol,  IV.  of  Nicene  and 
Post-Nicene  Fathers  (2d  series),  pp.  551  and 
552.) 

[Johnson's  epitome  is  so  unsatisfactory  that 
I  have  been  compelled  to  relegate  it  to  a  foot- 
note and  to  make  one  in  its  room  of  my  oivn.*] 

As  the  heretics  are  quoting  apocryphal 
writings,  an  evil  which  was  rife  even  as  early 
as  when  St.  Luke  wrote  his  gospel,  therefore 
I  have  thought  good  to  set  forth  clearly  what 
books  have  been  received  by  us  through  tra- 
dition as  belonging  to  the  Canon,  and  which 
we  believe  to  be  divine.  For  there  are  in  all 
twenty-two  books  of  the  Old  Testament. 
Genesis,  Exodus,  Leviticus,  Numbers,  Deu- 
teronomy. After  this  comes  Joshua,  and 
Judges,  and  Kuth.  The  four  books  of  the 
Kings,  counted  as  two.  Then  Chronicles, 
counted  the  two  as  one.     Then  First  and  Sec- 


ond Esdras  [i.e.  Ezra  and  Nehemiah].  Af- 
ter these  Psalms,  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  and 
Cantica.  To  these  follow  Job,  and  the 
Twelve  Prophets,  counted  as  one  book. 
Then  Isaiah,  Jeremiah  together  with  the  Epis- 
tle of  Baruch,  the  Lamentations,  Ezekiel,  and 
Daniel. 

Of  the  New  Testament  these  are  the  books 
[then  follows  the  complete  list  ending  with 
"the  Apocalypse  of  John"].  These  are  the 
fountains  of  salvation,  that  whoso  thirsteth, 
may  be  satisfied  by  the  eloquence  which  is  in 
them.  In  them  alone  (iv  tovtois  /xoVots)  is  set 
forth  the  doctrine  of  piety.  Let  no  one  add 
to  them,  nor  take  aught  therefrom. 

I  also  add  for  further  accuracy  that  there 
are  certain  other  books,  not  edited  in  the 
Canon,  but  established  by  the  Fathers,  to  be 
read  by  those  who  have  just  come  to  us  and 
wish  to  be  instructed  in  the  doctrine  of  piety. 
The  Wisdom  of  Solomon,  the  Wisdom  of  Si- 
rach,  Esther,  Judith,  Tobit,  the  Doctrine 
(Ai8ax»?)  of  the  Apostles  and  the  Pastor.  And 
let  none  of  the  Apocrypha  of  the  heretics  be 
read  among  you. 


THE  EPISTLE  OF  ST  ATHANASIUS  TO 
RUFFINIAN. 


2v  fxev 


TO.   VLU),    K.  T. 


*  Johnson  says  :  "  This  contains  the  Canon  of  Scripture  as 
we  now  receive  it  in  all  respects,  save  that  the  Epistle  of  Baruch 
is  reckoned  in  the  Canon,  but  Esther  is  not.  He  tells  us,  there 
are  other  books  never  reckoned  in  the  Canon  but  authorized  by 
the  fathers  to  be  read  by  the  Catechumens,  viz.  :  Wisdom  of  Sol- 
omon, of  Sirach,  Esther,  Judith,  and  Tobias,  and  that  which  is 
called  The  Doctrine  of  the  Apostles,  and  Pastor.  These  (says 
he)  are  read,  the  other  reckoned  of  the  Canons :  Apocryphal 
books  are  the  invention  of  heretics."  To  this  Johnson  appends 
a  note,  to  wit:  "It  is  the  common  opinion  of  learned  men  that 
the  reason  why  some  of  the  ancients  reckoned  the  book  of  Esther 
not  to  belong  to  the  Canon,  was  the  Apocryphal  chapters  added 
to  it  by  another  hand.  That  The  Doctrine  of  the  Apostles  is  a 
book  now  lost,  see  Dr.  Grabe's  Essay  on  this  subject." 

Who  these  "  learned  men  "  may  be,  I  do  not  know,  but  at  the 
time  of  the  writing  of  St.  Athanasius  the  position  of  the  Hebrew 
Esther  was  not  well  assured  in  the  restricted  Palestinian  Jewish 
Canon.  On  this  point  the  reader  should  make  himself  familiar 
with  The  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament  by  the  Rt.  Rev.  Tobias 
Mullen,  Roman  Catholic  Bishop  of  Erie,  U.  S.  A. 


(Found  translated  as  Epistle  LV.  in  Vol.  IV. 
of  the  Nicene  and  Post-Nicene  Fathers  (2d 
Series)  pp.  566  and  567.) 

It  has  been  determined  by  synods  in 
Greece,  Spain,  France,  that  they  who  have 
fallen,  or  been  leaders  of  impiety  [Arianism], 
be  pardoned  upon  repentance,  but  that  they 
have  not  the  place  of  the  clergy  ;  but  that 
they  who  were  only  drawn  away  by  force,  or 
that  complied  for  fear  the  people  should  be 
corrupted,  have  the  place  of  the  clergy  too. 
Let  the  people  who  have  been  deceived,  or 
forced,  be  pardoned,  upon  repentance  and 
pronouncing  anathema  against  the  miscreancy 
of  Eudoxius  and  Euzoius,  ringleaders  of  the 
Arians  (who  assert  that  Christ  is  a  creature) ; 
and  upon  professing  the  faith  of  the  Fathers 
at  Nice,  and  that  no  synod  can  prejudice  that. 


604 


APPENDIX 


V. 

THE  FIRST  CANONICAL  EPISTLE  OF  OUR  HOLY  FATHER  BASIL,  ARCH- 
BISHOP OF  CJ3SAREA  IN  CAPPADOCIA  TO  AMPHILOCHIUS,  BISHOP  OF 
ICONIUM.1 


(This  Epistle,  number  ct  xxxviij.,  is  found 
translated  in  Volume  VII J.  of  the  Second  Series 
of  the  Nicene  and  Post-Nicene  Fathers,  p. 
223  et  seqq.) 

Canon   I. 

As  to  the  question  concerning  the  Puritans 
the  custom  of  every  country  is  to  be  observed, 
since  they  who  have  discussed  this  point  are 
of  various  sentiments.  The  [baptism]  of  the 
Pepuzenes  I  make  no  account  of,  and  I  won- 
der that  Dionysius  the  canonist  was  of  an- 
other mind.  The  ancients  speak  of  heresies, 
which  entirely  break  men  off,  and  make  them 
aliens  from  the  faith.  Such  are  the  Manich- 
seans,  Valentinians,  Marcionites  and  Pepu- 
zenes, who  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  who 
baptize  into  the  Father,  Son  and  Montanus, 
or  Priscilla.  Schisms  are  caused  by  ecclesi- 
astical disputes,  and  for  causes  that  are  not 
incurable,  and  for  differences  concerning 
penance.  The  Puritans  are  such  schismatics. 
The  ancients,  viz.  Cyprian  and  Fermilian, 
put  these,  and  the  Encratites,  and  Hydropa- 
rastatse,  and  Apotactites,  under  the  same  con- 
demnation ;  because  they  have  no  longer  the 
communication  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  who  have 
broken  the  succession.  They  who  first  made 
the  departure  had  the  spiritual  gift ;  but  by 
being  schismatics,  they  became  laymen  ;  and 
therefore  they  ordered  those  that  were  bap- 
tized by  them,  and  came  over  to  the  Church, 
to  be  purged  by  the  true  baptism,  as  those 
that  are  baptized  by  laymen.  Because  some 
in  Asia  have  otherwise  determined,  let  [their 
baptism]  be  allowed  :  but  not  that  of  the  En- 
cratites ;  for  they  have  altered  their  baptism, 
to  make  themselves  incapable  of  being  re- 
ceived by  the  Church.  Yet  custom  and  the 
Fathers,  that  is  bishops,  who  have  the  admin- 
istration, must  be  followed  ;  for  I  am  afraid 
of  putting  an  impediment  to  the  saved  ; 
while  I  would  raise  fears  in  them  concerning 
their  baptism.  We  are  not  to  allow  their  bap- 
tism, because  they  allow  ours,  but  strictly 
to  observe  the  canons.  But  let  none  be  re- 
ceived without  unction.  When  we  received 
Zois  and  Saturninus  to  the  Episcopal  chair, 
we  made,  as  it  were,  a  canon  to  receive  those 
in  communion  with  them. 

1  These  canons  of  St.  Basil's  are  annotated  by  Zonaras,  Bal- 
Bamou  and  Aristenus,  and  of  them  there  is  also  the  Ancient  Epit- 
ome which  will  he  found  in  Beveridge  (Synod.,  Tom.  II.,  p.  47). 
Johnson  gives  the  date  of  these  canons  as  later  than  the  year  370. 


Canon  II. 

Let  her  that  procures  abortion  undergo  ten 
years'  penance,  whether  the  embryo  were  per- 
fectly formed,  or  not. 

Canon  III 
A  deacon  guilty  of  fornication,  is  deposed, 
not  excommunicated  ;  for  the  ancient  canon 
forbids  a  single  crime  to  be  twice  punished. 
And  further,  a  layman  excommunicated  may 
be  restored  to  the  degree  from  which  he  falls, 
but  a  clergyman  deposed  cannot.  Yet  it  is 
better  to  cure  men  of  their  sins  by  mortifica- 
tion, and  to  execute  the  canon  only  in  cases 
where  we  cannot  reach  what  is  more  perfect. 

Canon  IV. 

They  that  marry  a  second  time,  used  to  be 
under  penance  a  year  or  two.  They  that 
marry  a  third  time,  three  or  four  years.  But 
we  have  a  custom,  that  he  who  marries  a  third 
time  be  under  penance  five  years,  not  by 
canon,  but  tradition.  Half  of  this  time  they 
are  to  be  hearers,  afterwards  Co-standers  ; 
but  to  abstain  from  the  communion  of  the 
Good  Thing,  when  they  have  shewed  some 
fruit  of  repentance. 

Canon  V. 
Heretics,  upon  their  death-bed,  giving  good 
signs  of  their  conversion,  to  be  received. 

Canon  VI. 
Let  it  not  be  counted  a  marriage,  when  one 
belonging  to  the  canon  commits  fornication, 
but  let  them  be  forced  to  part.2 

Canon  VII. 
They  who  have  committed  sodomy  with 
men  or  brutes,  murderers,  wizards,  adulter- 
ers, and  idolaters,  have  been  thought  worthy 
of  the  same  punishment ;  therefore  observe 
the  same  method  with  these  which  you  do 
with  others.  We  ought  not  to  make  any 
doubt  of  receiving  those  who  have  repented 
thirty  years  for  the  uncleanness  which  they 
committed  through  ignorance ;  for  their 
ignorance  pleads  their  pardon,  and  their 
willingness  in  confessing  it ;  therefore  com- 

2  Johnson  adds  this  note,  "  i.e.  a  clergyman,  Monk,  Deaconess, 
etc."  See  Con.  Nic.,  xvj. 


THE  CANONS  OF  BASIL 


605 


niand  them  to  be  forthwith  received,  espe- 
cially if  they  have  tears  to  prevail  on  your 
tenderness,  and  have  [since  their  lapse]  led 
such  a  life  as  to  deserve  your  compassion. 

Canon  VIII. 

He  that  kills  another  with  a  sword,  or  hurls 
an  axe  at  his  own  wife  and  kills  her,  is  guilty 
of  wilful  murder ;  not  he  who  throws  a  stone 
at  a  dog,  and  undesignedly  kills  a  man,  or 
who  corrects  one  with  a  rod,  or  scourge,  in 
order  to  reform  him,  or  who  kills  a  man  in  his 
own  defence,  when  he  only  designed  to  hurt 
him.  But  the  man,  or  woman,  is  a  murder- 
er that  gives  a  philtrum,  if  the  man  that  takes 
it  die  upon  it ;  so  are  they  who  take  medi- 
cines to  procure  abortion  ;  and  so  are  they 
who  kill  on  the  highway,  and  rapparees. 

Canon  IX. 

Our  Lord  is  equal,  to  the  man  and  woman 
forbidding  divorce,  save  in  case  of  fornica- 
tion ;  but  custom  requires  women  to  retain 
their  husbands,  though  they  be  guilty  of  for- 
nication. The  man  deserted  by  his  wife  may 
take  another,  and  though  he  were  deserted 
for  adultery,  yet  St.  Basil  will  be  positive,  that 
the  other  woman  who  afterward  takes  him  is 
guilty  of  adultery  ;  but  the  wife  is  not  al- 
lowed this  liberty.  And  the  man  who  deserts 
an  innocent  wife  is  not  allowed  to  marry. 

Canon  X. 

That  they  who  swear  that  they  will  not  be 
ordained,  be  not  forced  to  break  their  oath. 
Severus,  Bishop  of  Masada,  who  had  ordained 
Cyriacus  priest  to  a  country  church,  subject 
to  the  Bishop  of  Mesthia,  is  referred  to  the 
divine  tribunal,  upon  his  pretending  that  he 
did  it  by  surprise.  Cyriacus  had  upon  his 
ordination,  been  forced,  contrary  to  canon,  to 
swear  that  he  would  continue  in  that  country 
church  ;  but  the  Bishop  of  Mesthia,  to  whom 
that  church  properly  belonged,  forced  him 
out.  St.  Basil  advises  Amphilochius  to  lay 
the  country  church  to  Masada,  and  make  it 
subject  to  Severus,  and  to  permit  Cyriacus  to 
return  to  it  and  save  his  oath  ;  and  by  this 
means  he  supposes  that  Longinus,  the  lord  of 
that  country,  would  be  prevailed  upon  to  alter 
his  resolution  of  laying  that  church  desolate, 
as  he  declared  he  would  upon  Cyriacus's  ex- 
pulsion. 

Canon  XL 
He  that  is  guilty  of  involuntary  murder, 
shall  do  eleven  years'  penance — that  is,  if  the 
murdered  person,  after  he  had  here  received 


the  wound,  do  again  go  abroad,  and  yet  after- 
ward die  of  the  wound. 

Canon  XII. 
The  canon  excludes  from  the  ministry  those 
who  are  guilty  of  digamy. 

Canon  XIII. 
Our  fathers  did  not  think  that  killing  in 
war  was  murder  ;  yet  I  think  it  advisable  for 
such  as  have  been  guilty  of  it  to  forbear  com- 
munion three  years. 

Canon  XIV. 

An  usurer,  giving  his  unjust  gain  to  the 
poor,  and  renouncing  his  love  of  money,  may 
be  admitted  into  the  clergy. 

Canons  XV.  and  XVI. 
Not  properly  canons,  but  explications  of 
Scripture,  and  therefore  neither  Balsamon, 
nor  Aristenus,  regard  them  as  canons. 

THE  SECOND   CANONICAL  EPISTLE 
OF  THE  SAME. 

(This  is  found  translated  in  the  same  volume 
last  referred  to,  Epistle  cxcix.,  p.  236  et  seqq.) 

Canon  XVII. 
I  made  a  canon,  that  they  at  Antioch,  who 
had  sworn  not  to  perform  the  sacred  offices 
should  not  do  it  publicly,  but  in  private  only  : 
As  to  Bianor,  he  is  removed  from  thence  to 
Iconium,  and  therefore  is  more  at  liberty ; 
but  let  him  repent  of  his  rash  oath  which  he 
made  to  an  infidel  for  avoiding  a  small 
danger. 

Canon  XVIII. 

That  the  ancients  received  a  professed 
virgin  that  had  married,  as  one  guilty  of 
digamy,  viz.,  upon  one  year's  penance  ;  but 
they  ought  to  be  dealt  with  more  severely 
than  widows  professing  continency,  and  even 
as  adulterers  :  But  they  ought  not  to  be 
admitted  to  profess  virginity  till  they  are 
above  sixteen  or  seventeen  years  of  age,  after 
trial,  and  at  their  own  earnest  request ; 
whereas  relations  often  offer  them  that  are 
under  age,  for  their  own  secular  ends,  but 
such  ought  not  easily  to  be  admitted. 

Canon  XIX. 
That    men,  though    they   seem    tacitly  to 
promise   celibacy,  by  becoming    monks,  yet 
do  it  not  expressly  ;  yet  I  think  fit  that  they 


606 


APPENDIX 


be  interrogated  too,  and  that  a  profession 
should  be  demanded  of  them,  that  if  they 
betake  themselves  to  a  carnal  life,  they  may 
be  punished  as  fornicators. 

Canon  XX. 

Women  professing  virginity,  though  they 
did  marry  while  they  were  heretics,  or  cate- 
chumens, yet  are  pardoned  by  baptism. 
What  is  done  by  persons  in  the  state  of 
catechumens,  is  never  laid  to  their  charge. 

Canon  XXI. 

A  married  man  committing  lewdness  with 
a  single  woman,  is  severely  punished  as  guilty 
of  fornication,  but  we  have  no  canon  to  treat 
such  a  man  as  an  adulterer  ;  but  the  wife 
must  co-habit  with  such  a  one :  But  if  the 
wife  be  lewd,  she  is  divorced,  and  he  that 
retains  her  is  [thought]  impious  ;  such  is  the 
custom,  but  the  reason  of  it  does  not  appear. 

Canon  XXII. 

That  they  who  have  stolen  virgins,  and  will 
not  restore  them,  be  treated  as  fornicators ; 
that  they  be  one  year  mourners,  the  second 
hearers,  the  third  received  to  repentance  and 
the  fourth  be  co-standers,  aud  then  admitted 
to  communion  of  the  Good  Thing.  If  the 
virgins  be  restored  to  those  who  had  espoused 
them,  it  is  at  their  discretion  to  marry  them, 
or  not ;  if  to  their  guardians,  it  is  at  their 
discretion  to  give  them  in  marriage  to  the 
raptors,  or  not. 

Canon  XXIII. 

That  a  man  ought  not  to  marry  two  sisters, 
nor  a  woman  two  brothers :  That  he  who 
marries  his  brother's  wife,  be  not  admitted 
till  he  dismiss  her. 

Canon  XXIV. 

A  widow  put  into  the  catalogue  of  widows, 
that  is,  a  deaconess  being  sixty  years  old, 
and  marrying,  is  not  to  be  admitted  to  com- 
munion of  the  Good  Thing,  till  she  cease  from 
her  uncleanness  ;  but  to  a  widower  that  mar- 
ries no  penance  is  appointed,  but  that  of 
digamy.  If  the  widow  be  less  than  sixty,  it 
is  the  bishop's  fault  who  admitted  her  dea- 
coness, not  the  woman's. 

Canon  XXV. 

He  that  marries  a  woman  that  he  has  cor- 
rupted, shall  be  under  penance  for  corrupting 
her,  but  may  retain  her  for  his  wife. 


Canon  XXVI. 
Fornication  is  neither  marriage,  nor  the 
beginning  of  marriage.  If  it  may  be,  it  is 
better  that  they  who  have  committed  fornica- 
tion together  be  parted  ;  but  if  they  be  pas- 
sionate lovers,  let  them  not  separate,  for  fear 
of  what  is  worse. 

Canon  XXVII. 
As  for  the  priest  that  is  engaged,  through 
ignorance,  in  an  unlawful  marriage,  I  have 
decreed,  that  he  retain  the  honour  of  the 
chair  ;  but  forbear  all  sacred  operations,  and 
not  give  the  blessing  either  in  private,  or 
piiblic,  nor  distribute  the  Body  of  Christ  to 
another,  nor  perform  any  liturgy  ;  but  let 
him  bewail  himself  to  the  Lord,  and  to  men, 
that  his  sin  of  ignorance  may  be  pardoned. 

Canon  XXVIII. 
That   it   is   ridiculous   to  vow  not  to   eat 
swine's  flesh,  and  to  abstain  from  it  is  not 
necessary. 

Canon  XXIX. 
That  princes  ought  not  to  swear  to  wrong 
their  subjects  :  that  such  rash  oaths  ought  to 
be  repented  of,  and  evil  not  to  be  justified 
under  pretence  of  religion. 

Canon  XXX. 

That  they  who  steal  women,  and  their  ac- 
complices, be  not  admitted  to  prayers,  or  be 
co-standers  for  three  years.  Where  no  vio- 
lence is  used,  there  no  crime  is  committed, 
except  there  be  lewdness  in  the  case.  A  widow 
is  at  her  own  discretion.  We  must  not  mind 
vain  pretences. 

Canon  XXXI. 

She,  whose  husband  is  absent  from  home, 
if  she  co-habits  with  another  man,  before  she 
is  persuaded  of  his  death,  commits  adultery. 

Canon  XXXII. 

The  clergyman  who  is  deposed  for  mortal 
sin,  shall  not  be  excommunicated. 

Canon  XXXIII. 

That  a  woman  being  delivered  of  a  child  in 
a  journey,  and  taking  no  care  of  it,  shall  be 
reputed  guilty  of  murder. 

Canon  XXXIV. 
That  the  crime  of  women  under  penance 
for  adultery,  upon  their  own  confession,  or 


THE   CANONS   OF   BASIL 


60? 


otherwise  convicted,  be  not  published,  lest  it 
occasion  their  death  ;  but  that  they  remain 
out  of  communion  the  appointed  time. 

Canon  XXXV. 
If  a  woman  leave  her  husband,  and  if  it  do 
upon  inquiry  appear,  that  she  did  it  without 
reason,  she  deserves  to  be  punished ;  but  let 
him  continue  in  communion. 

Canon  XXXVI. 
A  soldier's  wife  marrying  after  the  long  ab- 
sence of  her  husband,  but  before  she  is  certi- 
fied of  his  death,  is  more  pardonable  than  an- 
other woman,  because  it  is  more  pvedible  that 
he  may  be  dead. 

Canon  XXXVII. 
That  he,  who  having  another  man's  wife  or 
spouse  taken  away  from  him,  marries  another, 
is  guilty  of  adultery  with  the  first,  not  with 
the  second. 

Canon  XXXVIII. 
If  a  woman  run  after  him  that  has  corrupt- 
ed her,   she   shall  be  under  penance   three 
years,  though  the  parents   be  reconciled  to 
her. 

Canon  XXXIX. 

She,  who  continues  to  live  with  an  adulter- 
er, is  all  that  time  an  adulteress. 

Canon  XL. 
She  that  [being  a  slave]  gives  herself  up  to 
the  will  of  a  man,  without  the  consent  of  her 
master,  commits  fornication ;  for  pacts  of 
those  who  are  under  the  power  of  others  are 
null. 

Canon  XLI. 

A  widow  being  at  her  own  discretion,  may 
marry  to  whom  she  will. 

Canon  XLII. 
Slaves   marrying  without   the   consent   of 
their  masters,  or  children  without  consent  of 
their  fathers,  it  is  not  matrimony  but  forni- 
cation, till  they  ratify  it  by  consenting. 

Canon  XLIII. 
That  he  who  gives  a  mortal  wound  to  an- 
other is  a  murderer,  whether  he  were  the  first 
aggressor,  or  did  it  in  his  own  defence. 

Canon  XLIV. 
The  deaconess  that  has  committed  lewd- 
ness with  a  pagan  is  not  to  be  received  to 
communion,  but  shall  be  admitted  to  the  ob- 
lation, in  the  seventh  year — that  is,  if  she  live 


in  chastity.  The  pagan,  who  after  [he  has 
professed]  the  faith,  betakes  himself  again  to 
sacrilege,  returns  [like  the  dog]  to  his  vomit  : 
we  therefore  do  not  permit  the  sacred  body 
of  a  deaconess  to  be  carnally  used. 

Canon  XLV. 
He  that  assumes  the  name  of  a  Christian, 
but    reproaches  Christ,  shall  have  no  advan- 
tage from  his  name. 

Canon  XL VI. 
She  that  marries  a  man  who  was  deserted 
for  a  while  by  his  wife,  but  is  afterward  dis- 
missed upon  the  return  of  the  man's  former 
wife,  commits  fornication,  but  ignorantly : 
she  shall  not  be  prohibited  marriage,  but  it  is 
better  that  she  do  not  marry. 

Canon  XLVII. 
Encratites,  Saccophorians,  and  Apotactites, 
are  in  the  same  case  with  the  Novatians.  "We 
re-baptize  them  all.  There  is  a  diversity  in 
the  canons  relating  to  the  Novatians,  no  canon 
concerning  the  other.  If  it  be  forbid  with  you, 
as  it  is  at  Rome  for  prudential  causes,  yet  let 
reason  prevail.  They  are  a  branch  of  the  Mar- 
cionists  ;  and  though  they  baptize  in  the  name 
of  the  three  divine  Persons,  yet  they  make  God 
the  author  of  evil,  and  assert,  that  wine  and 
the  creatures  of  God,  are  defiled.  The  bishops 
ought  to  meet,  and  so  to  explain  the  canon, 
that  he  who  does  [baptize  such  heretics]  may 
be  out  of  danger,  and  that  one  may  have  a 
positive  answer  to  give  to  those  that  ask  it. 

Canon  XLVIII. 
A  woman   dismissed   from    her   husband, 
ought  to  remain  unmarried,  in  my  judgment. 

Canon  XLIX. 
If  a  slave  be  forced  by  her  master,  she  is 
innocent. 

Canon  L. 
We  look  on  third  marriages  as  disgraceful 
to  the  Church,  but  do  not  absolutely  condemn 
them,  as  being  better  than  a  vague  fornication. 


THE   THIRD   EPISTLE   OF  THE   SAME 
TO   THE   SAME. 

(Found  in  lib.  cit.,  p.  255,  et  seqq.     Epistle 
ccxvij.) 

Canon  LI. 
That  one  punishment  be  inflicted  on  lapsing 
clergymen,  viz. :  deposition,  whether  they  be 


608 


APPENDIX 


in  dignity,  or  in  the  ministry  which  is  given 
without  imposition  of  hands. 

Canon  LII. 
A  woman  delivered  in  the  road,  and  neg- 
lecting her  child,  is  guilty  of  murder,  unless 
she  was  under  necessity  by  reason  of  the  soli- 
tude of  the  place,  and  the  want  of  necessaries. 

Canon  LIII. 

A  widow  slave  desiring  to  be  married  a  sec- 
ond time,  has,  perhaps,  been  guilty  of  no  great 
crime  in  pretending  that  she  was  ravished ; 
not  her  pretence,  but  voluntary  choice  is  to 
be  condemned;  but  it  is  clear,  that  the  pun- 
ishment of  digamy  is  due  to  her. 

Canon  LIV. 

That  it  is  in  the  bishop's  power  to  increase 
or  lessen  penance  for  involuntary  murder. 

Canon  LV. 

They  that  are  not  ecclesiastics  setting  upon 
highwaymen,  are  repelled  from  the  commun- 
ion of  the  Good  Thing ;  clergymen  are  de- 
posed. 

Canon  LVI. 

He  that  wilfully  commits  murder,  and  after- 
wards repents,  shall  for  twenty  years  remain 
without  communicating  of  the  Holy  Sacra- 
ment. Four  years  he  must  mourn  without 
the  door  of  the  oratory,  and  beg  of  the  com- 
municants that  go  in,  that  prayer  be  offered 
for  him ;  then  for  five  years  he  shall  be  ad- 
mitted among  the  hearers,  for  seven  years 
among  the  prostrators ;  for  four  years  he  shall 
be  a  co-stander  with  the  communicants,  but 
shall  not  partake  of  the  oblation  ;  when  these 
years  are  completed,  he  snail  partake  of  the 
Holy  Sacrament. 

Canon  LVII. 

The  involuntary  murderer  for  two  years 
shall  be  a  mourner,  for  three  years  a  hearer, 
four  years  a  prostrator,  one  year  a  co-stander, 
and  then  communicate. 

Canon  LVIII. 

The  adulterer  shall  be  four  years  a  mourner, 
five  a  hearer,  four  a  prostrator,  two  a  co- 
stander. 

Canon  LIX. 

The  fornicator  shall  be  a  mourner  two  years, 
two  a  hearer,  two  a  prostrator,  one  a  co- 
stander. 


Canon  LX. 
Professed  virgins  and  monks,  if  they  fall 
from  their  profession,  shall  undergo  the  pen- 
ance of  adulterers. 

Canon  LXI. 
The  thief,  if  he  discover  himself,  shall  do 
one  year's  penance  ;  if  he  be  discovered  [by 
others]  two  ;  half  the  time  he  shall  be  a  pros- 
trator, the  other  half  a  co-stander. 

Canon  LXII. 
He  that  abuses  himself  with  mankind,  shall 
do  the  penance  of  an  adulterer. 

Canon  LXIII. 
And  so  shall  he  who  abuses  himself  with 
beasts,  if  they  voluntarily  confess  it. 

Canon  LXIV. 
The  perjured  person  shall  be  a  mourner  two 
years,  a  hearer  three,  a  prostrator  four,  a  co- 
stander  one. 

Canon  LXV. 
He  that  confesses  conjuration,  or  pharmacy, 
shall  do  penance  as  long  as  a  murderer. 

Canon  LXVI. 
He  that  digs  the  dead  out  of  their  graves, 
shall  be  a  mourner  two  years,  a  hearer  three 
years,  a  prostrator  four  years,  a  co-stander 
one  year. 

Canon  LXVII. 
Incest  with  a  sister  is  punished  as  murder. 

Canon  LXVIII. 

All  incestuous  conjunction,  as  adultery. 

Canon  LXIX. 
A  reader  or  minister  lying  with  a  woman  he 
has  only  espoused,  shall  cease  from  his  func- 
tion one  year  ;  but  if  he  have  not  espoused  her, 
he  shall  [wholly]  cease  from  his  ministry. 

Canon  LXX. 

The  priest  or  deacon  that  is  polluted  in 
lips,  shall  be  made  to  cease  from  his  function, 
but  shall  communicate  with  the  priests  or 
deacons.  He  that  does  more  shall  be  de- 
posed. 

Canon  LXXI. 

He  that  is  convicted  to  have  been  conscious 
to  any  of  these  crimes,  but  not  discovered  it, 
shall  be  treated  as  the  principal. 


THE   CANONS   OF   BASIL 


609 


Canon  LXXII. 
He  that  gives  himself  to  divination,  shall 
be  treated  as  a  murderer. 

Canon  LXXIII. 
He  that  denied  Christ,  is  to  be  communi- 
cated at  the  hour  of  death,  if  he  confess  it, 
and  be  a  mourner  till  that  time. 

Canon  LXXIV. 
[The  bishop]  that  has  the  power  of  binding 
and  loosing,  may  lessen  the  time  of  penance, 
to  an  earnest  penitent. 

Canon  LXXV. 
He  that  commits  incest  with  a  half-sister, 
shall  be  a  mourner  three  years,  a  hearer  three 
years,  a  co-stander  two  yeai's. 

Canon  LXXVI. 
And  so  shall  he  be  who  takes  in  marriage 
his  son's  wife. 

Canon  LXXVII. 
He  that  divorces  his  wife,  and  marries  an- 
other, is  an  adulterer ;  and  according  to  the 
canons  of  the  Fathers,  he  shall  be  a  mourner 
one  year,  a  hearer  two  years,  a  prostrator 
three  years,  a  co-stander  one  year,  if  they  re- 
pent with  tears. 

Canon  LXXVIII. 
So  shall  he  who  successively  marries  two 
sisters. 

Canon  LXXIX. 
So  shall  he  who  madly  loves  his  mother-in- 
law,  or  sister. 

Canon  LXXX. 
The  Fathers  say  nothing  of  polygamy  as 
being  beastly,  and  a  thing  unagreeable  to 
human  nature.  To  us  it  appears  a  greater 
sin  than  fornication  :  Let  therefore  such  [as 
are  guilty  of  it]  be  liable  to  the  canons,  viz.  : 
after  they  have  been  mourners  one  year — let 
them  be  prostrators  three  years — and  then  be 
received. 

Canon  LXXXI. 
They  who  in  the  invasion  of  the  barbarians 
have  after  long  torments,  eaten  of  magical 
things  offered  to  idols,  and  have  sworn 
heathen  oaths,  let  them  not  be  received  for 
three  years  ;  for  two  years  let  them  be  hear- 
ers, for  three  years  prostrators,  so  let  them 
be  received  ;  but  they  who  did  it  without 
force,  let  them  be  ejected  three  years,  be 
hearers  two  years,  prostrators  three  years,  co- 
standers  three  years,  so  let  them  be  admitted 
to  communion. 


Canon  LXXXII. 
They  who  by  force  have  been  driven  to  per- 
jury, let  them  be  admitted  after  six  years ; 
but  if  without  force,  let  them  be  mourners 
two  years,  hearers  two  years,  the  fifth  year 
prostrators,  two  years  co-standers. 

Canon  LXXXIII. 
They  that  follow  heathenish  customs,  or 
bring  men  into  their  houses  for  the  contriv- 
ing pharmacies,  or  repelling  them,  shall  be 
one  year  mourners,  one  year  hearers,  three 
years  prostrators,  one  year  co-standers. 

Canon  LXXXIV. 
We  do  not  judge  altogether  by  the  length 
of  time,  but  by  the  circumstances  of  the 
penance.  If  any  will  not  be  drawn  from 
their  carnal  pleasures,  and  choose  to  serve 
them  rather  than  the  Lord,  we  have  no  com- 
munication with  them. 

Canon  LXXXV. 
Let  us  take  care  that  we  do  not  perish 
with  them ;  let  us  warn  them  by  night 
and  day,  that  we  may  deliver  them  out  of  the 
snare  or  however  save  ourselves  from  their 
condemnation. 

FROM  AN  EPISTLE  OF  THE  SAME 
TO  THE  BLESSED  AMPHILOCHIUS 
ON  THE  DIFFERENCE   OF  MEATS. 

{Found  translated  in  lib.  cit.,  p.  287,  part  of 
Epistle  ccxxxvj.) 

Canon  LXXXVI. 

Against  the  Encratites,  who  would  not  eat 
flesh. 

OF  THE  SAME  TO  DIODORUS  BISHOP 
OF  TARSUS,  CONCERNING  A  MAN 
WHO  HAD  TAKEN  TWO  SISTERS 
TO   WIFE. 

(Found  translated  in  lib.  cit.,  p.  212  et  seqa. 
Epistle  clx.) 

Canon  LXXXVII. 

Contains  the  preface  of  his  letter  to  Dio- 
dorus  Bishop  of  Tarsus,  in  which  he  tells  him 
of  a  letter  shewed  him  in  justification  of  a 
man's  marrying  two  sisters  bearing  his  name  ; 
but  he  hopes  it  was  forged. 

Canon  LXXXVIII. 
Contains  the  rest  of  the  letter,  in  which  he 
argues  and  inveighs  against  this  practice. 


VOL.   xiv. 


r  r 


610 


APPENDIX 


OF  THE  SAME  TO  GREGORY  A  PRES- 
BYTER, THAT  HE  SHOULD  SEPA- 
RATE FROM  A  WOMAN  WHO  DWELT 
WITH   HIM. 

Canon  LXXXIX. 

A  letter  to  Gregory,  an  unmarried  priest, 
charging  him  to  dismiss  a  woman  whom  he 
kept,  though  he  was  70  years  of  age,  and 
declared  himself  free  from  all  amorous  affec- 
tions ;  and  St.  Basil  would  seem  to  believe 
him  in  this  particular  ;  but  cites  the  III. 
canon  of  Nice  against  this  practice,  bids  him 
avoid  scandal,  place  the  woman  in  a  monas- 
tery, and  be  attended  by  men  :  he  threatens 
him  that  if  he  does  not  comply,  he  shall  die 
suspended  from  his  office,  and  give  account 
to  God :  that  he  shall  be  an  anathema  to  all 
the  people,  and  they  who  receive  him  [to  com- 
munion] be  excommunicated. 


OF  THE  SAME  TO  THE  CHOREPIS- 
COPI,  THAT  NO  ORDINATIONS 
SHOULD  BE  MADE  CONTRARY  TO 

THE  CANONS. 

(Found  translated  in  Vol.  VIII.  Nicene  and 
Post-Nicene  Fathers,  p.  157.     Epistle  liv.) 

Canon  XC. 

A  letter  to  his  Village-bishop  : 1  he  com- 
plains of  the  want  of  discipline  of  the  multi- 
plying of  the  clergy,  and  that  without  due 
examination  and  enquiry  into  their  morals  ; 
that  they  had  dropped  the  old  custom,  which 
was  for  the  priests  and  deacons  to  recommend 
to  the  Village  Bishop,  who  taking  the  testimo- 
nial, and  giving  notice  of  it  to  the  [City] 
Bishop,  did  afterwards  admit  the  minister 
into  the  sacerdotal  list  ;  that  the  number  of 
the  inferior  clergy  was  unreasonably  increased, 
especially  in  time  of  war,  when  men  got  into 
orders  to  avoid  the  press :  he  orders  a  list  of 
the  clergy  in  every  village  to  be  sent  to  him, 
and  who  admitted  him,  if  any  have  been  ad- 
mitted into  the  inferior  orders  by  priests, 
that  they  be  looked  on  as  laymen.  Let  not 
who  will,  put  his  name  into  the  list.  Re-ex- 
amine those  who  are  there,  expel  the  unworthy, 
admit  none  without  my  consent  for  the 
future  ;  if  you  do  he  shall  be  counted  a  lay- 
man. 


1  Johnson  by  mistake  has  the  singular  instead  of  the  plural. 


OF  THE  SAME  TO  HIS  SUFFRAGANS 
THAT  THEY  SHOULD  NOT  ORDAIN 
FOR  MONEY. 

(Found  translated  in  lib.  cit,  pp.  156  and  157. 
Epistle  liii.) 

Canon  XCI. 

One  letter  to  the  bishop  subject  to  him, 
wherein  he  prohibits  to  take  money  for  orders, 
and  to  bring  merchandize  into  the  church, 
which  is  entrusted  with  the  Body,  and  Blood 
of  Christ ;  they  had  their  pay  after  the  ordi- 
nation was  performed  ;  this  he  calls  an  arti- 
fice, and  declares,  that  he  who  is  guilty  of  it 
shall  depart  from  the  altar  in  his  country, 
and  go  buy  and  sell  the  gift  of  God  where  he 
can. 

FROM  CHAPTER  XVII.  OF  THE  BOOK 
ST.  BASIL  WROTE  TO  BLESSED 
AMPHILOCHIUS  ON  THE  HOLY 
GHOST. 

(Found  translated  in  lib.  cit.,  p.  40  et  seqq.) 

Canon  XCII. 

He  speaks  of  the  written  doctrine,  and  the 
unwritten  tradition  of  the  Apostles,  and  says, 
that  both  have  the  same  efficacy  as  to  relig- 
ion. The  unwritten  traditions  which  he  men- 
tions, are  the  signing  those  who  hope  in 
Christ  with  the  Cross ;  praying  toward  the 
East,  to  denote,  that  we  are  in  quest  of  Eden, 
that  garden  in  the  East  from  whence  our  first 
parents  were  ejected  (as  he  afterwards  ex- 
plains it),  the  words  of  invocation  at  the  con- 
secration of  the  Bread  of  Eucharist,  and  the 
cup  of  eulogy  ;  the  benediction  of  the  baptis- 
mal water,  the  chrism  and  of  the  baptized 
person  ;  the  trine  immersion,  and  the  renun- 
ciations made  at  baptism  ;  all  which  the 
Fathers  concealed  from  those  who  were  not 
initiated.  He  says  the  dogmata  were  always 
kept  secret,  the  Kerugmata  published  ;  he 
adds  the  tradition  of  standing  at  prayer  on 
the  first  day  of  the  week,  and  the  whole  Pen- 
tecost (that  is,  from  Easter  to  Whitsunday), 
not  only  to  denote  our  rising  with  Christ,  but 
as  a  prefiguration  of  our  expecting  an  eternal 
perfect  day,  for  the  enjoyment  of  which  we 
erect  ourselves  ;  and  lastly,  the  profession  of 
our  faith  in  Father,  Son  and  Holy  Ghost  at 
baptism. 

Canon  XCIII. 

He  asserts  the  Doxology  [in  these  words] 
"with  the  Holy  Spirit,"  to  be  an  unwritten, 
Apostolic  tradition.  For  this  is  a  dogma  full 
of  authority,  venerable  for  its  antiquity. 


THE   CANONS   OF  GREGORY  NYSSEN 


611 


FROM  THE    LETTER  OF    BASIL    THE 
GREAT  TO   THE   NICOPOLITANS. 

There  is  also  in  Tilius  and  Bishop  Beve- 
ridge  here1  inserted  an  epistle  of  St.  Basil 
the  Great  to  the  Nicopolitans,  comforting 
them  under  the  loss  of  their  church  or  ora- 


tory, and  telling  them,  that  they  ought  not  to 
be  concerned  that  they  worship  God  in  the 
open  air,  for  that  the  eleven  Apostles  wor- 
shipped God  in  an  upper  room,  where  they 
were  cooped  up,  while  they  that  crucified 
Jesus  performed  their  worship  in  a  most 
famous  Temple. 


VI. 


THE    CANONICAL   EPISTLE    OF    ST.    GREGORY,  BISHOP  OF    NYSSA,  TO    ST. 

LETOIUS,  BISHOP  OF  MELITENE.2 


Canon  I. 
At  Easter  not  only  they  who  are  transformed 
by  the  grace  of  the  laver,  i.e.  baptism,  but 
they  who  are  penitents  and  converts,  are  to 
be  brought  to  God,  i.e.  to  the  Communion  : 
for  Easter  is  that  Catholic  feast  in  which 
there  is  a  resurrection  from  the  fall  of  sin. 

Canon  II. 

They  who  lapse  without  any  force,  so  as  to 
deny  Christ,  or  do  by  choice  turn  Jews, 
idolaters,  or  Manichees,  or  infidels  of  any 
sort,  not  to  be  admitted  to  communion  till 
the  hour  of  death ;  and  if  they  chance  to 
recover  beyond  expectation,  to  return  to  their 
penance.  But  they  who  were  forced  by  tor- 
ments, to  do  the  penance  of  fornication. 

Canon  III. 

If  they  who  run  to  conjurers  or  diviners, 
do  it  through  unbelief,  they  shall  be  treated 
as  they  who  wilfully  lapse,  but  if  through 
want  of  sense,  and  through  a  vain  hope  of 
being  relieved  under  their  necessities,  they 
shall  be  treated  as  those  who  lapse  through 
the  violence  of  torment. 

Canon  IV. 

That  fornicators  be  three  years  wholly 
ejected  from  prayer,  three  years  hearers, 
three  years  prostrators,  and  then  admitted  to 
communion ;  but  the  time  of  hearing  and 
prostrating  may  be  lessened  to  them  who  of 
their  own  accord  confess,  and  are  earnest 
penitents.  That  this  time  be  doubled  in  case 
of  adultery,  and  unlawful  lusts,  but  discretion 
to  be  used. 


Canon  V. 

Voluntary  murderers  shall  be  nine  years 
ejected  out  of  the  church,  nine  years  hearers, 
nine  years  prostrators ;  but  every  one  of 
these  nine  years  may  be  reduced  to  seven  or 
six,  or  even  five,  if  the  penitents  be  very 
diligent.  Involuntary  murderers  to  be  treated 
as  fornicators,  but  still  with  discretion,  and 
allowing  the  communion  on  a  death-bed,  but 
on  condition,  that  they  return  to  penance  if 
they  survive. 

Canon  VI. 

That  the  Fathers  have  been  too  gentle 
toward  the  idolatry  of  covetous  persons,  in 
condemning  to  penance  only  robbery,  digging 
of  graves,  and  sacrilege,  whereas  usury  and 
oppression,  though  under  colour  of  contract, 
are  forbidden  by  Scripture.  That  highway- 
men returning  to  the  Church,  be  treated  as 
murderers.  They  that  pilfer,  and  then  confess 
their  sin  to  the  priest,  are  only  obliged  to 
amendment,  and  to  be  liberal  to  the  poor ; 
and  if  they  have  nothing,  to  labour  and  give 
their  earnings. 

Canon  VII. 

They  who  dig  into  graves,  and  rake  into 
the  ashes  and  bones  of  the  dead,  in  order  to 
find  some  valuable  thing  buried  together  with 
the  corpse,  (not  they  who  only  take  some 
stones  belonging  to  a  sepulchre,  in  order  to 
use  them  in  building)  to  do  the  penance  of 
fornicators. 

Canon  VIII. 

He  observes  that  by  the  law  of  Moses, 
sacrilege  was  punished  as  murder,  and  that 
the  guilty  person  was  stoned  to  death,  and 
thinks  the  Fathers  too  gentle,  in  imposing 
a  shorter  penance  on  sacrilege  than  adultery. 


1  I.e.,  at  the  end,  after  the  Epistle  of  Gennadius. 

2  These  Canons,  in  Beveridge's  Synodicon,  are  annotated  only  by  Balsamon. 


R  r  2 


612 


APPENDIX 


VII. 

FROM    THE    METRE    POEMS    OP    ST.    GREGORY     THEOLOGUS,    SPECIFYING 
WHICH  BOOKS  OF  THE  OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENT  SHOULD  BE  READ.1 


Let  not  other  books  seduce  your  mind  :  for 
many  malignant  writings  have  been  dissemi- 
nated. The  historical  books  are  twelve  in 
number  by  the  Hebrew  count,  [then  follow 
the  names  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament 
but  Esther  is  omitted,  one  Esdras,  and  all  the 
Deutero-Canonical  books].  Thus  there  are 
twenty  -  two  books  of  the  Old  Testament 
which  correspond  to  the  Hebrew  letters.    The 


number  of  the  books  of  the  New  Mystery  are 
Matthew,  who  wrote  the  Miracles  of  Christ  for 
the  Hebrews ;  Mark  for  Italy  ;  Luke,  for 
Greece  ;  John,  the  enterer  of  heaven,2  was 
a  preacher  to  all,  then  the  Acts,  the  xiv. 
Epistles  of  Paul,  the  vij.  Catholic  Epistles, 
and  so  you  have  all  the  books.  If  there  is 
any  beside  these,  do  not  repute  it  genuine. 


VIII 

FROM  THE   IAMBICS  OF   ST.   AMPHILOCHIUS   THE  BISHOP  TO   SELEUCUS, 

ON  THE  SAME  SUBJECT.3 


We  should  know  that  not  every  book  which 
is  called  Scripture  is  to  be  received  as  a  safe 
guide.  For  some  are  tolerably  sound  and 
others  are  more  than  doubtful.  Therefore 
the  books  which  the  inspiration  of  God  hath 
given  I  will  enumerate.  [Then  follows  a  list 
of  the  proto-canonical  books  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament, Esther  alone  being  omitted.  All  the 
deutero-canonical  books  are  omitted.  He 
then  continues]  to  these  some  add  Esther.  I 
must  now  show  what  are  the  books  of  the 
New  Testament.  [Then  follow  all  the  books 
of  the  New  Testament  except  the  Revelation. 


He  continues,]  But  some  add  to  these  the 
Revelation  of  John,  but  by  far  the  majority 
say  that  it  is  spurious.  This  is  the  most 
true  canon  of  the  divinely  given  Scriptures. 

NOTE. 

We  have  thus  four  [five  if  we  accept  the 
Laodicean  list  as  genuine,]  different  canons 
of  Holy  Scripture,  all  having  the  approval  of 
the  Council  in  Trullo  and  of  the  Seventh 
Ecumenical.  From  this  there  seems  but  one 
conclusion  possible,  viz.  :  that  the  approval 
given  was  not  specific  but  general. 


IX. 

THE  CANONICAL  ANSWERS  OF  TIMOTHY,  THE  MOST  HOLY  BISHOP  OF 
ALEXANDRIA,  WHO  WAS  ONE  OF  THE  CL  FATHERS  GATHERED  TO- 
GETHER AT  CONSTANTINOPLE,  TO  THE  QUESTIONS  PROPOSED  TO  HIM 
CONCERNING  BISHOPS   AND   CLERICS.' 


Question  I. 

If  a  lad  of  seven  years  old,  or  a  man,  being 
a  catechumen,  being  present  at  the  oblation, 
does  eat  of  it  through  ignorance,  what  shall 
be  done  in  this  case  ? 

Answer.  Let  him  be  illuminated,  i.e.  bap- 
tized, for  he  is  called  by  God. 

Question  II. 

If  baptism  be  desired  for  a  catechumen  that 
is  possessed,  what  shall  be  done  ? 

Answer.  Let  him  be  baptized  at  the  hour 
of  death,  not  otherwise. 


Question  III. 

Ought  a  communicant  to  communicate,  if 
he  be  possessed  ? 

Answer.  If  he  do  not  expose  or  blaspheme 
the  Mysteries,  let  him  communicate  not  al- 
ways, but  at  certain  times. 

Question  IV. 

If  a  catechumen  be  sick,  and  in  a  frenzy, 
so  that  he  cannot  make  profession  of  his  faith, 
can  he  be  baptized,  at  the  entreaty  of  his 
friends  ? 

Answer.  He  may,  if  he  be  not  possessed. 


1  Not  being  satisfied  with  Johnson,  I  have  supplied  a  transla- 
tion from  Beveridge.  It  also  is  found  in  Aristenus's  Epitome. 
Balsamon  has  written  a  brief  echolion  adding  nothing  of  impor- 
tance to  the  text. 

2  This  seems  to  imply  a  knowledge  of  the  Revelation,  although 
it  is  not  mentioned. 


3  That  is  the  Canon  of  Holy  Scripture.  I  have  substituted  my 
own  Epitome,  in  the  room  of  Johnson's,  translating  the  original 
as  it  is  found  in  Beveridge's  Synodicon,  Tom.  II.,  p.  179.  It  is 
also  in  Aristenus's  Epitome,  Balsamon  has  no  scholion  on  this 
passage. 

4  Beveridge's  Synodicon  gives  notes  by  Balsamon  only. 


THE   ANSWERS   OF   TIMOTHY 


613 


Question  V. 

Can  a   man   or  woman  communicate  after 
performing  the  conjugal  act  over  night  ? 
Answer.  No.      1  Cor.  vii.  5. 

Question  VI. 

The  day  appointed  for  the  baptism  of  a 
woman  ;  on  that  day  it  happened  that  the  cus- 
tom of  women  was  upon  her  ;  ought  she  then 
to  be  baptized  ? 

Ansiver.  No,  not  till  she  be  clean. 

Question  VII. 

Can  a  menstruous  woman  communicate  ? 
Ansiver.  Not  until  she  be  clean. 

Question  VIII. 

Ought  a  woman  in  child-bed  to  keep  the 
Paschal  fast  ? 
Answer.  No. 

Question  IX. 

Ought  a  clergyman  to  perform  the  oblation, 
or  pray,  while  an  Arian  or  heretic  is  present  ? 

Ansiver.  As  to  the  divine  oblation,  the  dea- 
con, after  the  kiss,  makes  a  proclamation, 
"Let  all  that  are  not  Communicants  walk 
off ; "  therefore  such  persons  ought  not  to  be 
present,  except  they  promise  to  repent,  and 
renounce  their  heresy. 

Question  X. 

Is  a  sick  man  obliged  to  keep  the  Paschal 
fast? 

Answer.  No. 

Question  XI. 

If  a  clergyman  be  called  to  celebrate  a  mar- 
riage, and  have  heard  that  it  is  incestuous  ; 
ought  he  to  comply,  and  perform  the  obla- 
tion? 

Ansiver.  No  ;  he  must  not  be  partaker  of 
other  men's  sins. 


Question  XII. 

If  a  layman  ask  a  clergyman  whether  he 
may  communicate  after  a  nocturnal  pollution? 

Ansiver.  If  it  proceed  from  the  desire  of  a 
woman,  he  ought  not :  but  if  it  be  a  tempta- 
tion from  Satan,  he  ought ;  for  the  tempter 
will  ply  him  when  he  is  to  communicate. 

Question  XIII. 

When  are  man  and  wife  to  forbear  the  con- 
jugal act  ? 

Ansiver.  On  Saturday,  and  the  Lord's  day  ; 
for  on  those  days  the  spiritual  sacrifice  is 
offered. 

Question  XIV. 

Shall  there  be  an  oblation  for  him,  who  be- 
ing distracted,  murders  himself  ? 

Answer.  Not  except  the  case  be  very  clear 
that  he  was  distracted. 

Question  XV. 

If  one's  wife  be  possessed  to  such  a  degree, 
as  that  she  be  bound  with  irons,  and  the  man 
cannot  contain,  may  he  marry  another  ? 

Answer.  I  can  only  say  it  would  be  adultery 
so  to  do. 

Question  XVI. 

If  a  man  in  washing  or  bathing,  swallow  a 
drop  of  water,  may  he  communicate  after  it  ? 

Ansiver.  If  Satan  find  an  occasion  of  hin- 
dering us  from  the  communion,  he  will  the 
oftener  do  it. 

Question  XVII. 

Are  they,  who  hear  the  Word,  and  do  it 
not,  damned? 

Ansiver.  If  we  neither  do  it,  or  repent  that 
we  have  not  done  it. 

Question  XVIII. 

At  what  age  are  sins  imputed  to  us  by  God  ? 

Ansiver.  According  to  every  one's  capacity 
and  understanding ;  to  one  at  ten,  to  another 
when  older. 


X. 

THE    PROSPHONESUS     OF     THEOPHILUS,    ARCHBISHOP     OF     ALEXANDRIA, 
WHEN  THE  HOLY  EPIPHANIES  HAPPENED  TO  FALL  ON  A  SUNDAY.1 


Canon  I. 
Because  the  fast  of  Epiphany  chances  to  fall 
on  a  Lord's  day,  let  us  take  a  few  dates,  and 
so  break  our  fast,  and  honour  the  Lord's  day, 


and  shew  our  dislike  of  heresy,  and  yet  not 
wholly  neglect  the  fast  which  should  be  ob- 
served on  this  day ;  eating  no  more  till  our 
evening  assembly  at  three  afternoon. 


1  Johnson  gives  the  date  as  about  a.d.  3S5.    These  are  annotated  only  by  Balsamon. 


614 


APPENDIX 


THE  COMMONITOEY  OF  THE  SAME 
WHICH  AMMON  KECEIVED  ON  AC- 
COUNT  OF  LYCUS. 

Canon  II. 
Let  [the  priests]  who  have  communicated 
with  the  Arians,  be  retained  or  rejected,  as  the 
custom  of  every  church  is  ;  but  so,  that  other 
orthodox  [priests]  be  ordained,  though  the 
others  continue.  As  the  orthodox  bishops 
did  in  Thebais,  so  let  it  be  in  other  cities. 
They  who  were  ordained  by  Bishop  Apollo, 
and  afterwards  communicated  with  the  Arians, 
if  they  did  it  of  their  own  accord,  let  them  be 
censured  ;  but  if  they  only  did  it  in  obedience 
to  the  bishop,  let  them  be  continued  ;  but  if 
all  the  people  abdicate  them,  others  must  be 
ordained.  And  if  Bistus  the  priest  be  found 
to  have  committed  uncleanness  with  a  woman 
dismissed  from  her  husband,  let  him  not  be 
permitted  to  be  a  priest.  But  this  is  no  preju- 
dice to  the  bishop  who  ordained  him,  if  he 
did  it  ignorantly  ;  since  the  Holy  Synod  com- 
mands unworthy  men  to  be  ejected,  though 
they  be  not  convicted  until  after  ordination. 

Canon  III. 
Let  Bishop  Apollo's  sentence  against  his 
priest  Sur  prevail,  though  he  has  the  liberty 
of  being  further  heard. 

Canon  IV. 

If  Panuph  the  deacon  married  his  brother's 
daughter  before  baptism,  let  him  continue 
among  the  clergy,  if  she  be  dead,  and  he  had 
not  to  do  with  her  after  his  baptism  ;  but  if 
he  married  her,  and  cohabited  with  her  while 
he  was  a  communicant,  let  him  be  ejected 
from  the  clergy,  without  prejudice  to  the 
bishop  who  ordained  him,  if  he  did  it  igno- 
rantly. 

Canon  V. 

If  it  do  evidently  appear,  that  Jacob,  while 
he  was  reader,  did  commit  fornication,  and 
was  ejected  by  the  priests  (irptvfivTipwv),  and 
yet  afterwards  ordained,  let  him  be  ejected, 
and  not  otherwise. 

Canon  VI. 
That  all  in  holy  orders  unanimously  choose 
those  who  are  to  be  ordained,  and  then  the 
bishop  examine  [them]  ;  or  that  the  bishop 
ordain  them  in  the  midst  of  the  church,  all 
that  are  in  holy  orders  consenting,  and  the 
bishop  with  a  loud  voice  asking  the  people, 
who  are  then  to  be  present,  whether  they  can 
give  their  testimony  [to  the  parties  to  be  or- 
dained] ;    and   that   ordination   be   not  per- 


formed in  private  ;  if  there  be  in  the  remote 
country,  who  while  they  were  communicants 
[with  the  Arians]  communicated  in  their  opin- 
ions, let  them  not  be  ordained  until  they  be 
examined  by  orthodox  clergymen,  in  the  pres- 
ence of  the  bishop,  who  is  to  charge  the  peo- 
ple, that  there  be  no  running  up  and  down  in 
the  middle  of  the  church,  or  service. 

Canon  VII. 
Let  the  clergymen  distribute  all  that  is  of- 
fered by  way  of  sacrifice,  after  so  much  as  was 
necessary  has  been  consumed  in  the  Mysteries. 
Let  not  the  catechumens  taste  of  them,  but 
clergymen  and  communicants  only.1 

Canon  VIII. 

One,  Hierax,  had  delated  a  clergyman  as 
guilty  of  fornication.  Bishop  Apollo  defended 
him.  Theophilus  orders  the  matter  to  be  ex- 
amined. 

Canon  IX. 

That  an  03conomus  be  created,  by  the  con- 
sent of  all  that  are  in  Holy  Orders,  with  the 
concurrence  of  Bishop  Apollo,  that  so  the 
goods  of  the  Church  be  expended  as  they 
ought. 

Canon  X. 
That  the  widows,  poor,  and  travellers  be 
not  disturbed  ;  and  that  no  one  make  a  prop- 
erty of  the  goods  of  the  Church. 


OF    THE    SAME    TO    AGATHO    THE 
BISHOP. 

Whereas  Maximus  has  for  ten  years  lived 
in  unlawful  marriage,  but  pretends  that  it  was 
through  ignorance,  and  that  they  are  now 
parted  by  mutual  consent,  let  them  stand 
among  the  catechumens,  if  it  appear  that 
they  be  in  earnest. 


OF    THE    SAME    TO    MENAS    THE 
BISHOP. 

Theophilus  was  informed,  that  the  priest  in 
Geminus,  a  village,  had  repelled  Kyradium  (a 
woman)  from  the  communion :  Theophilus 
approves  of  it,  because  she  had  done  wrong, 
and  was  unwilling  to  make  satisfaction  ;  but 
orders  her  to  be  admitted  to  communion 
upon  repentance. 

1  Johnson  gives  this  note.  "  To  eat  the  main  of  what  was  left, 
was  not  at  all  inconsistent  with  reserving  so  much  as  was  neces- 
sary for  foreseen  and  unforeseen  emergencies." 


CYRIL   ALEXANDRIA   AND    GENNADIUS 


615 


THE  NARRATIVE  OF  THE  SAME  CON- 
CERNING THOSE  CALLED  CATHARI. 

Because  the  great  synod  held  at  Nice  has 
decreed,  That  [the  clergymen]  who  come  over 


to  the  Church  from  the  Novatians  be  or- 
dained ;  do  you  ordain  those  that  come  over, 
if  their  life  be  upright,  and  there  be  no  objec- 
tion. 


XI. 

THE    CANONICAL    EPISTLE   OF    OUR    HOLY    FATHER   AMONG  THE    SAINTS, 
CYRIL,  ARCHBISHOP  OF   ALEXANDRIA,    ON   THE   HYMNS.1 


CYRIL   TO   DOMNUS. 

This  letter  contains  a  complaint  of  one, 
Peter,  deposed  from  his  See,  yet  retaining 
the  character  of  a  bishop,  who  thought  his 
cause  good,  but  complains  that  he  had  not 
time  and  opportunity  given  him  for  his  de- 
fence ;  and  that  whatever  he  had,  was  taken 
away  from  him.  He  desires  Domnus,  who 
was  a  Metropolitan,  that  he  would  call  a 
sjmod,  and  let  him  have  a  hearing  ;  and  that 
such  bishops  as  Peter  suspected  of  prejudice 
against  him  should  not  be  permitted  to  be 
his  judges.  He  thinks  it  very  hard,  that  not 
only  what  belonged  to  the  Church,  but  every 
thing  else  was  taken  from  him  ;  and  com- 
plains that  all  bishops  were  called  to  account 
for  every  thing  they  received,  whether  from 
the  Church,  or  by  any  other  means.  Peter 
had  indeed  signed  an  instrument  of  resigna- 
tion ;  but  Cyril  says,  that  he  was  terrified  into 
it ;  and  that  he  would  have  no  such  resigna- 
tion be  of  force  except  he  that  made  it  de- 
served deposition. 


OF  THE  SAME  TO  THE  BISHOPS  OF 
LIBYA  AND  PENTAPOLIS. 

There  is  another  Epistle  of  the  same  father, 
complaining  to  the  bishops  of  Libya  and  Pen- 
tapolis.  That  some  who  had  been  refused 
ordination  by  their  own  bishop,  or  cast  out  of 
the  monasteries  for  their  irregularity,  were 
ordained  by  a  surprise  upon  some  other 
bishop,  and  that  just  as  they  came  from  their 
bride-bed,  and  then  went  and  performed  the 
oblation,  or  any  other  office,  in  the  monaster- 
ies from  which  they  had  been  ejected,  which 
gave  great  offence.  He  charges  the  bishops 
to  take  care  of  this  for  the  future  and,  if  any 
were  to  be  ordained,  to  enquire  into  their 
lives,  and  whether  they  are  married,  and 
when,  and  how  ;  and  orders,  that  catechu- 
mens, who  had  been  separated  for  lapsing,  be 
baptized  at  the  hour  of  death. 


XII.2 

THE  ENCYCLICAL  LETTER  OF  GENNADIUS,  PATRIARCH  OF  CONSTANTI- 
NOPLE AND  OF  THE  HOLY  SYNOD  MET  WITH  HIM  TO  ALL  THE  HOLY 
METROPOLITANS  AND  TO   THE   POPE   OF  THE   CITY   OF  ROME.3 


To  the  most  beloved  of  God,  fellow-minis- 
ter, Gennadius  and  the  most  holy  synod  as- 
sembled in  the  royal  city  which  is  New  Rome, 
sendeth  greeting. 

As  our  Lord  without  money  and  without 
price  ordained  his  Apostles,  so  should  we  or- 


I  clain  the  clergy,  for  the  Lord  has  placed  us  in 
their  grade  and  in  their  stead  («s  tov  €kuvwv 
/3a9r]6v  Te  koX  tottov).  Nor  should  we  use  any 
ingenious  sophisms  to  avoid  this  plain  duty, 

|  explicitly  laid  upon  us,  not  only  by  the  words 
of  the  Gospel  but  also  by  a  canon  of  the  great 

!  Ecumenical  Synod  of  Chalcedon. 


1  Johnson  gives  the  date  of  this  as  about  the  year  412  a.d..  3In  this  I  have  not  followed  Johnson,  but  translated  from 

» The   Greeks   speak  of   the  canons   of   The  Thirteen   Holy  ,  Beveridge,  Synod.,  Tom.  II.,  p.  181. 

Fathers,  counting  in  the  number  St.  Cyprian's  canon,  but  as  this  I 

was  really  Synodal  I  have  placed  it  in  that  category. 


FINIS. 


INDEXES 


As  this  volume  is  composed  (1)  of  the  "Decrees  and  Canons"  of  the  Councils,  along  with 
extracts  from  the  proceedings  of  some  of  the  principal  ones,  and  (2)  of  Scholia  that  are  given  to 
explain  and  illustrate  those  other  main  parts  in  the  collection,  an  attempt  is  made  to  combine  in  the 
same  set  of  indexes  the  references  to  these  two  parts,  and  at  the  same  time  to  easily  distinguish 
them  to  the  eye  by  the  character  of  the  types  that  are  used.  This  is  thought  to  be  simpler  and 
more  generally  useful  than  either  to  have  separate  indexes  for  the  text  and  Scholia,  or  to  index 
all  the  references  without  distinction.  The  references  that  belong  to  the  Decrees,  Canons,  and 
Extracts,  are  placed  in  heavy  face  type,  while  those  that  belong  to  the  Scholia  are  in  the  usual 
lighter  face  type  of  the  volume.  Where  the  same  figures  in  different  type  are  found  together,  it 
means  that  a  reference  is  made  to  some  fact  in  the  text  on  that  page,  and  also  to  some  comment 
in  the  Scholia  upon  the  same  page. 


INDEX  OF  AUTHORS 


Abraham  Echellensis,  43. 

Addis  and  Arnold,  27  n. 

Ado,  Bishop  of  Vienne,  526. 

Adrian  I.,  Bishop  of  Rome,  45. 

African  Code,  392,  401, 402,  437  seq. 

Agatho,  Pope,  264. 

Aguirre,  Cardinal,  373  n. 

Alcuin,  276. 

Alexander,  Bishop  of  Alexandria, 
592. 

Alexander  Natalis,  119. 

Allies,  T.  W.,  179. 

Ambrose,  St.,  37,  72,  333,  334. 

Amerbachian  manuscript,  125. 

Ammon,  correspondent  of  Theo- 
philus  of  Alexandria,  614. 

Amort,  80  n. 

Analecta  Grwca,  263. 

Anastasius,  Pope,  526. 

Anderson,  Joseph,  284. 

Anianus,  Saint,  283. 

Annates  de  PhilosopMe  Chretienne, 
2n. 

Annates  Frankorum,  526. 

Apostolical  Canons,  8,  33,  52,  69, 
100,  101,  108,  109,  110,  111, 
113,  115,  117,  118,  119,  120, 
121,  146,  150,  151,  272,  279, 
363,  364,  365,  369,  370,  378, 
391,  392,  445,  448,  453,  454, 
456,   468,    516,    570. 

Apostolical  Constitutions,  31,41,51, 
52,    137,    144,    146,  177. 

Aristenus,  23,  40,  67,  71,  79,  84, 
111,  115,  117,  127,  131,  133, 
147,  151,  274,  288,  377,  382, 
386,  417,  421,  430,  563,  612. 

Asseman,  43,  356  n.,  516. 

Athanasius,  Bishop  of  Alexandria, 
3,  4,  5,  9,  10,  33,  37,  40,  43, 
55,  72,  175,  176,  208,  209,  269, 
272,  333,  335,  434. 

Athenagoras,  6. 

Aubespine,  Gabriel  de  1',  29,  32, 
126,  154. 

Augusti,  21. 

Augustine  of  Hippo,  32,  37,  42,  131, 
136,  153,  155,  272,  277,  286, 
334,  380,  398,  422. 

Augustinus,  Antonius,  372. 

Ballerini,  editors,  90,  94,  105,  171, 
266,  289,  293,  304,  317,  414, 
421,  456,  464. 

Balsamon,  8,  12,  17,  20,  23,  24,  30, 
45,  75,  85,  94,  100,  108,  117, 
125,  126,  127,  128,  129,  130, 
131,  133,  141,  147,  149,  151, 
171,  177,  179,  181,  231,  232, 
235,  271,  272,  277,  278,  370, 
371,  374,  375,  382,  386,  393, 
394,  396,  399,  402,  408,  417, 
421,  430,  439,  512,  513,  559, 
562,    563,    566,    570,  590. 

Barnabas'  s  Epistle,  209. 

Baronius,  xii. ,  43,  52,  124  n. ,  127, 
162  n.,  166,  245,  263,  351,  373, 
516,  575,  579,  584,  587. 


Basil's  Canons,  403,  404. 

Basil  of  Csesarea,  7,  9,  29,  37,  38, 

74,    21,  80,  81,  173,  175,   176, 

184,  270,  286. 
Basnage,  Jacques,  314. 
Battifol,  M.  Pierre,  134. 
Baumer,  135. 

Baur,  historical  critic,  264. 
Bede,  Ven.,  271,  285. 
Bellarmine,  R.  F.  R.,  Jesuit,  xii, 

52,  245,  579,  584,  586. 
Bernard,  St.,  284. 
Beveridge,  Bishop  of  St.  Asaph,  xi, 

8,  15, 17,  18,  20,  21,  42,  59,  63, 

70,  79,  101,  125,  171,  181,  231, 

235,  269,  278,  385,    393,    403, 

438,   441,  473,   513,    556,    591, 

592,  593,  612. 
Biblioteca   dell'  Accademia  storica 

giuridica,  136  n. 
Bickell,     Geschichte    des    Kirchen- 

rechts,  592. 
Bingham,  Rev.  Joseph,  9,  21,    25, 

28,  71,  137,  269,  286. 
Binius,    Patristic   Editor,    89,    127, 

373  n  ,  517,  579,  582. 
Binterim,  Archaeologist,  21,  132. 
Blastares,  Matthew,  124. 
Blondel,  David,  89,  434. 
Blunt,  J.  J.,  112. 
Bona,  Cardinal,  141,  155,  378,  380, 

392,  561. 
Bonaventura,   Franciscan   Scholar, 

36. 
Booh  of  Eastern  Law,  34. 
Bossuet,  36,  192  seq.,  244  seq.,  352. 
Bower,  Archibald,  434. 
Bright,  Dr.  William,  9,  12,  28,  173, 

181,    184,   218,  254,    271,  272, 

276,   279,  281,  282,    284,    287, 

293,  295. 
Browne,  Bishop  Harold,  366. 
Bruce,  Dr.  A.'B.,  174  n.,  212. 
Brun,  Pierre  Le,  136. 
Bruns,  Herm.  Theod.,  45. 
Bryce,  Professor  James,  277. 
Bull,  Bishop  George,  4,  5. 
Bulletin  de  Correspondance  Ilelle- 

nique,  147. 
Burchard,  John,  31. 
Butler,  Daniel,  8. 
Butler,  Bishop  Joseph,  29. 

Capitularia  Regum  Francorum, 
166  n. 

Caranza,  25. 

Cardwell,  Dr.  Edward,  375. 

Cassiodorus,  historian,  37. 

Catholic  Dictionary,  301. 

Cave,  Dr.  William,  21,  90. 

Ceilliers,  Remi,  89,  105,  110,  127, 
158,  434. 

Charles  the  Great,  276 ;  his  Capitu- 
lar, 385. 

Chronicle  of  St.  Bertinus,  526. 

Chrysostom,  30,  37,  136,  137,  272, 
273,  275,  285,  286,  379,  393. 

Church  Quarterly  Review,  135. 


Clemens  Alex.,  6,  9,  72. 

Clemens  Rom.,  9,  13,  96,  209. 

Code  of  the  Universal  Church,  231. 

Codex  Africanus,  269,  272,  280. 

Codex  Canonum,  60,  231. 

Codex  Theodosianus,  146,  268,  269, 
272,  273,  277. 

Codex  of  Luna,  171. 

Conrade  a  Lichtenau,  526. 

Cornelius  of  Rome,  9. 

Corpus  Juris  Canoniei,  9,  11,  12, 
13,  21  n.,  24,  29,  33,  35,  36,  39, 
42,  63,  64,  67,  72,  80,  83,  84, 
85,  92,  93,  94,  96,  97,  98,  99, 
100,  101,  110,  111,  114,  117, 
118,  119,  120,  121,  124,  126, 
131,  140,  144,  147,  148,  149, 
152,  157,  158,  179,  269,  270, 
271,  272,  273,  274,  275,  279, 
280,  282,  283,  284,  286,  287, 
364,  370,  372,  374,  378,  382, 
404,  415,  416,  421,  422,  425, 
494,  557,  558,  560,  563,  564, 
565,    566,    569. 

Cotelerius,  Patristic  Editor,  72. 

Council  of  Trent,  375. 

Cresconius,  canonist,  116. 

Curzon,  Robert,  141. 

Cyprian,  Bishop  of  Carthage,  25, 
30,  380. 

Cyril,  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  197, 
212,  214,  216,  217,  233,  335. 

Cyril,  Bishop  of  Jerusalem,  32,  37, 
208,  272,  408. 

D'Aguirre,  Cardinal,  43. 

Dale,  145. 

Daille  (Dalheus),  592. 

Damian,  Peter,  167. 

Denziger,  201. 

Dictionnaire  universel  et  complet  des 

Conciles  tant  generaux  que  par- 

ticuliers,  xx. 
Didache,  13,  14. 
Didacus,    Archbishop    of    Compo- 

stella,  568. 
Dionysius  Exiguus,  13,  20,  25,  126, 

127,  158, 171,  179,  184,  214, 271, 

278,  279,  417,  441. 
Dionysius  the  Areopagite,  335. 
Dollinger,  Ignaz  von,  176,  316. 
Dorner,  Isaac  August,  264. 
Dressel,  Patristic  Editor,  5. 
Ducange,    Charles  du   Fresne,    10, 

21,  22,  146,  148,  394. 
Duchesne,  Andrew,  137, 143  n. ,  145, 

289,  575. 
Dupin,  Louis  Ellies,  16,  420. 
Durandus  of  Pourcain,  141. 

Egbert  of  York,  38. 

Eginhard  of  Seligenstadt,  24. 

Epiphanius,  7,  37,  41,  72,  146,  168, 
175,  176,  366,  367. 

Euchologion,  164. 

Eusebius's  Ecclesiastic  History,  6,  8, 
9,  10,  17,  18,  29,  86,  141,  144, 
148,  175,  176,  184,  208,  272. 


620 


INDEX- OF   AUTHORS 


Evagrius,    Scholasticus,    263,    316, 
486. 

Fabricius,  Johannes  Albert,  43. 
Ferrandus,  Canonist,  127. 
Ferraris,  Rev.  E.  S.,  372. 
Ffoulkes,  Bibliotheca  Prompta,  10, 

40,  89,  90,  159,  218. 
Field,  Dean,  524. 
Fleidner,  Pastor,  41  n. 
Fleury,    Claude,  20   n.,    166,    177, 
268,  269,  281,    286,    288,   356, 
363,  372,  379,  556,  586. 
Flodoard  of  Epernay,  421. 
Forbes,  Bishop  A.  P.,  4. 
Fortunatus,  Life  of  St.  Mcvrtm,  o83. 
Foster,     General    Preface    to    the 

Works  of  Alcitin,  578. 
Freeman,  Norman  Conquest,  271. 
Fuehs,  Bibliotheca,  11,  17,  110,  129, 

159,  171,  430,  440,  458. 
Fulgentius  Ferrandus,  69. 
Fulton,  Dr.  John,  150,  365. 
Funk,  Franz  Xavier,  37  n. 

Gallandus,  August,  204,  237,  264. 

Garnier,  Jean,  314,  316,  321. 

Gaudentius,  Bishop  at  Sardica,  418. 

Gazette  ArcMologique,  143. 

Gelasius,  Pope,  13,  40,  44,  51,  53. 

Genebrardus,  584. 

Gibbon,  Edward,  207  n. 

Gieseler,  Johann  Carl  Ludwig,  264. 

Giraldus  Cambrensis,  284. 

Goar,  Euchologion,  268- 

Godefridus  Hermantius,  119,  l^-±. 

Goldast,  Melchior,  578. 

Gothofred,  147,  273. 

Gratian,  9,  10,  11,  12,  13,  21,  24 
30,  33,  35,  36,  39,  40,  42,  63, 
64,  67,  79,  80,  83,  84,  85,  86, 
92,  93,  94,  97,  98,  101,  110, 
111,  114,  115,  116,  117,  118, 
119,  120,  121,  126,  131,  140, 
144,  147,  148,  152,  157,  158, 
179,  269,  270,  271,  272,  273, 
274     275,    278,  279,  280,  282, 

283,  284,  286,  287,  358,  362, 
364,  370,  372,  374,  378,  382, 
404,  421,  422,  425,  494,  557, 
558,    560,    566,  568,  569. 

Greek  Pontificals,  177. 

fireen    Dr   T.  L.,  80  n. 

Gregory  I.,  38,  146,  186,  269,  276, 

284,  378,  436. 
Gregory  of  Nazianzum,  13,  37,  20b, 

334 
Gregory  of  Nyssa,  37,  38,  272,  335. 
Gregory,  Thaum.,  25,  335. 
Gregory  of  Tours,  38,  176. 
Grosart,  Eev.  Dr.,  591  n. 
Guerard,  M.  L.,  575. 
Guettee,  H.  W.,  2  n. 
Gury,  Jean  Pierre,  37. 

Haddan,  A.  W.,  21. 

Haddan  &  Stubbs,  38. 

Hahn,  Johann  Michael,  264. 

Halloix,  314. 

Hammond,  W.  A.,  10,  16,  21,  25, 

65, 137,  138,  150,  271,  278,  279. 
Hardouin,    Jean,    38,    44,  45,  200, 

219  n.,  264,  304,  321. 


Harmenopulus,  74. 

Harnack,  Adolf,  13,  14,  144,  162  n., 

317,  555,  575. 
Hatch,  Dr.  Edwin,  184. 
Hefele,  Carl  Joseph  von,  xn,  5,  8, 
9,11,12,16,  17,21,23,28,40, 
42,  43,  44,  51,  64,  65,  68,  80, 
82,  89,  93,  100,  106,  110,  114, 
124,130,132,141,147,150,loo, 
159,  163,  166,  172,  177,  178, 
196,  208,  211,  213,  214,  217, 
219,  232,  242,  263,  266  n.,  26/, 
269,  272,  279,  290,  293,  295, 
304,  305,  316,  317,  353  oo6, 
373  n.,  402,  405,  417,  419,  421, 
434,  438,  516,  539,  557,  o61, 
562,  563,  578,  579,  583,  586. 

Herbst,  158,  160,  171,421. 

Hergenrother,  Cardinal,  2/2. 

Hermann  Contractus,  6,  526. 

Hermenopulus,  23,  241,  242,  421. 

Hermes,  Pastor,  92. 

Hervetus,  269,  278,  417. 

Herzog,  Johann  Jakob,  112. 

Hilary  of  Poitiers,  37,  105, 175,  335, 
434. 

Hincmar,    Archbishop   of   Rheims, 
45,  526,  579. 

Hippolytus,  6,  9,  145. 

Hodgkin,  282,  283,  575. 

Holstenius,  Lucas,  182. 

Hort,   Dr.    E.    I.    A.,    162   n 

Hosius,  Bishop  of  Cordova,  2/2. 


Ibas,  Bishop  of  Edessa  200. 
Ignatius  of   Antioch,   4,    5,   6,   10, 

39  n.,  96,  208. 
Irenseus,  Bishop  of  Lyons,  6,  9,  209. 
Isidore    Mercator,    121,    126,    12/, 

157,   158,   164,   171,   184,    269, 

271,  278,  416,  417. 
Isidore  of  Pelusium,  286. 
Isidore  of  Seville,  279,  286,  436. 
Ivo  of  Chartres,  31. 

Jahn,  Johann,  6. 

Jerome   (Hieronymus) ,  32,  00,  «w, 

72,  275,  366,  367,  413. 
Joannes  Damascenus,  4,  7,  209. 
John,  Archbishop  of  Constantino- 
ple, 335. 
John  of  Antioch,  101,  184. 
Johnson,  Rev.   John,   11,   68,   10b, 
271,  276,  278,    403,  450,    4o9, 
462,    463,  467,  472,    480,  481, 
482,  493,  516,  600,  601,  615. 
Josephus  ^gypt.,  184. 
Journal  Asiatique,  2  n. 
Journal  of  Hellenic  Studies,  14/. 
Joyce,  J.  W.,  284. 
Julius  of  Rome,  9 
Justellus,  Christopher,  11,  16,  40, 
45,  63,  79,   125,  231,  23o,  269, 
278,  425. 
Justin  Martyr,  6,  8,  13,  30,  92,  136, 

146,380. 
Justinian  I.,  Roman  Emperor,  131, 
178,  268,  274,    279,   290,    382, 
387,  422,  566,  567,  569. 
Keble,  Rev.  John,  285. 
Kellner,  114. 
Kingdon,  156. 
Kitchin,  277,  283. 


Kober,  272. 
Krebbs,  62. 

Labbe,  Philippe,  3  n.,  17  n.. ,19,  121, 
163  n.,  164.512,  525,579,586. 

Labbe  &  Cossart,  vii.,  45,  63,  10/, 
166,  197,  218,  220  seq.,  231, 
234,  235,  236,  237,  247,  251, 
259  260,  265,  266,  267,  302, 
305,  321,  340,  349,  359,  441, 
512,  513,   529,    539,   583,  584, 

586. 
Lambeck,  Peter,  316. 
Lambert  of  Hersfeld,  8,  24,  28,  150. 
L'Ami  du  Clerge,  367. 
Launoy,  15,  526. 
Laurents,  96. 
Lee,  F.  G.,  285. 
Legg,  J.  Wickham,  396. 
Leo  Allatius,  155,  167,  389. 
Leo  the  Great,  19,  22,  37,  277,  286, 
288,   289,   293,  334,  33o,  404, 
421. 
Le  Quien,  166,  169,  234,  278. 

Leunclavius,  xxxiii. 

Libellus  Synodmis,  62. 

Liber  Pontificalis,  145. 

Liberates,  208,  285,  321. 

Liddell  &  Scott,  31n.,70,  210,  219, 
386,  505. 

Liddon,  Dr.  Henry  Parry,  156. 

Lightfoot,    Bishop   of  Durham,  4, 
41  n..  90,  96,  144,  207  n. 

Lipsius,  Dr.,  163. 

Littledale,  Dr.  R,  E.,80n. 

Lombard,  Peter,  27. 

Loofs,  317.  # 

Louis  le  Debonnaire,  5/6. 

Lupus,  Servatus,  52,  557,  5o9. 

Mabillon,  Jean,  166. 
Macaulay,  Lord,  207  n. 
Macrostkh  (Semiarian),  5. 
Mansi,  12,  37,  38,  45,  73,  105,  1/0, 
181,  200,   263,  266,  268,    269, 
270,  271,   272,   273,  274,    276, 
277,  278,    281,   286,  304,    340, 
413,  464,    579,    586. 
Marca,  Peter  de,  18,  124,  o21,  415, 

417,  439,  592. 
Marcian,  Roman  Emperor,  2/  /. 
Marius  Mercator,  206,  217,  229. 
Marquardt,  Freher,  145. 
Marriott,  W.  B.,  37,  141. 
Martigny,  147.      ; 
I  Martin  Bracarensis,  110,  1/U,  1*1. 
i  Mason,  Rev.  A.  J.,  28,  216. 

Matthew  of  Paris,  526. 
i  Matthieu  de  Larroque,  591. 
;  Maximus  the  Abbot,  241. 

Melito,  Bishop  of  Sardes,  208. 
!  Mendham,  529  n.,  538  n. 
Methodius,  Cyrillus,  6. 
Mevrick,  Rev.  F.,  524  n. 
Michael  the  Stammerer,  576. 
Michaud,  Joseph,  578. 
Migne,  Pat.  Lot.,  220,  227,  266,  340, 
349,  370  n.,  441,  536,578,582, 

Migne,  Pat.  Grac. ,  38, 197,  206,  209, 

251,321. 
Milman,  Dean,  180,  219: 
Minucius,  Felix,  72. 


INDEX   OF  AUTHOKS 


621 


Moller,  German  writer,  317. 
Monaldini  of  Venice,  379. 
Montfaucon,   Bernard    de,    43,   45, 

176. 
Morinus,  Henricus,  21,  25,  39,  42, 

147,  272. 
Muratori,  Ludovico  Antonio,  31,  38, 

166. 

Natalis,  Alex.,  4,  52,  435. 

Neale,  J.  M.,  10,   136  n.,  165,  176, 

180,    281,    390,   523,  524,  561, 

576  u. 
Neander,  Joachim,  130,   132,    133, 

158. 
Nestorius,  206,  210,  211,  212,  213, 

214,  215,  216,  217. 
Newman,  J.  H.,  5,  173,  175,  176, 

269,  286,  288. 
Noris.  Cardinal,  316,  317. 

Origen,  6,  208. 
Orsi,  Cardinal,  162. 

Pagi,  Antoine.  89,  90,  105,  124. 
Palladius,   Bishop  of   Helenopolis, 

21,  268,  272,  273,  286. 
Palmer,  Sir  William,  524,  578,  579. 
Pamphilus  the  Martyr,  4. 
Paschal,  Pope,  568. 
Pearson,  Bishop  of  Chester,  4,  169, 

208,  209. 
Percival,  H.  R.,  136,  170. 
Pereira,  Antonio,  363. 
Pertz,  Blonumenta  Germanica,  276, 

277. 
Petavius,  Dionysius,  200,  206,  212, 

213,  214,  230,  578,  582,  583. 
Phillips,  52. 
Philostorgius,  28. 

Photius,  Patriarch  of  Constantino- 
ple,   45,    101,    169,    186,    232, 

241. 
Pierre  le  Brun,  31  n. 
Plumptre,  Dean,  32,  97. 
Polycrates,  Bishop  of  Ephesus,  9. 
Pontificate  Romanum,  154. 
Porson,  Richard,  6. 
Prisca  [See  Versio  Prisca]. 
Probst,  German  writer,  136,  145. 
Prosper  of  Aquitaine,  31  n. 
Pseudo-Isidore,  40,  112. 
Pugin,  Augustus,  141. 
Pulcheria,  Empress,  277. 
Puller,  E.  W.,  113,  162  n.,  518. 
Pusey,  Dr.  E.  B.,  162  n.,  168,  169, 

232,  233,  317,  417. 

Quesnel,  Pasquier,  285. 

Rabanus  Maurus,  21. 
Raymund,  415,  416. 
Raine,  Rev.  Canon,  281. 
Reeves,  Bishop  of  Down,  286. 
Regino,  Abbot  of  Prum,  31,  526. 
Renaudot,  Eusebe,  43. 
Revillout,  Eugene,  2. 
Revue  de  questions  historiques,  2  n. 
Richer,  Edmond,  414,  417. 


Robertson,  Canon  J.  C. ,  218. 

Rock,  141. 

Roger  Hoverden,  526,  579. 

Roisselet  de  Sauelieres,  586. 

Rossi,  J.  B.  de,  147. 

Routh,  Dr.  Martin  Joseph,  6,  21,  24, 

28,  70,  79,  205   n.,   208,    225, 

271,  276,  280. 
Roziere,  Eugene  de,  352. 
Ruflnus,  of  Aquileia,  15,  44,  52. 
Ruinart,  Thierry,  28. 
Rupertus,  De  divinis  qfficiis,  406. 
Rusticus,  264. 

Sacramentary,  Gallican,  166. 
Sacramentary ,  Gelasian,  166. 
Salmasius  (Saumaise),  15. 
Salmon,  Dr.  George,  162  n. 
Sehaff,  Dr.  Philip,  553  n. 
Schoell,  Historia  Literarum  Grce- 

carum,  xxx. 
Schrockh,  Johann  Matthias,  105. 
Scipio  Maffei,  37. 
Scudamore,  Rev.  W.  E.,  31. 
Sententim  Severi,  263. 
Severus,  Monophysite,  Patriarch  of 

Antioch,  263. 
Severus,  Sulpicius,  435. 
Sidonius  Apollin-aris,  38,  270. 
Sirmond,  579. 

Sismondi,  Charles  Sismondi  de,  586. 
Skene,  William  Forbes,  284. 
Smith  &  Cheetham,  Diet.  Chr.  Ant. , 

8,  21,   32,  34,  41,   72,  89,  97, 

159,  218. 
Smith   &  Wace,  Bid.   Chr.  Biog., 

3  n.,  4,  89  n.,90,  163,  218. 
Socrates,  Eccl.  Hist.,  8,  18,  20,  28, 

32,  33,  51,  52,  53,   89,  97,  100, 

105,    114,    164,    175,  177,  185, 

208,    270,    272,   273,  363,  413, 

435. 
Sophocles,  6. 
Sozomen,  Eccl.  Hist.,  8,  20,  33,  51, 

89,  105,  114,  164,  185,  270,  273, 

413. 
Spelman,  Sir  H  ,  284. 
Spittler,  Sammtlichen  Werken,  159, 

414,  417. 
Stanley,  Dean,  270. 
Stillingfleet,  Bishop  Edward,  15. 
Suarez,  Francis,  586. 
Suicer,  John  Gaspar,  67,  71,  269. 
Suidas,  lexicographer,  6. 
Surius,  Patristic  Editor,  579. 
Swainson,  The  Nicene  and  Apostles' 

Greeds,  162. 
Swete,  H.  B.,  4,  165,  173. 

Tacitus,  36. 

Tatian,  Christian  Apologist,  0,  209. 

Tertullian,  28,  30,  41,  42,  144,  146, 
273. 

Thearistus,  African  Translator,  40. 

Theilo,  African  Translator,  40. 

Theodore,  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury, 38. 

Theodore,  Bishop  of  Mopsuestia, 
208,  211. 


Theodoret,  Bishop  of  Cyrus,  8,  37, 

53,  173,  175,  182,  215,  241,  273, 

432. 
Tlieodosian  Code,  143. 
Theodosius,  Roman  Emperor,  19. 
Theophilus  of  Antioch,  6. 
Theophylact,  Commentator,  169. 
Thomas  Aquinas,  36. 
Thomas  of  Walsingham,  568. 
Thomassen,   12,  21,  22,   23,   27  n., 

34,  42,  52,  84,  86,  366. 
Tilius,  John,  Bishop  of  S.  Brieuc, 

231,  473. 
Tillemont,  20  n. ,  89,  105, 110,  162  n., 

163,  169,  171,    173,    177,    226, 

240,   264,   276,  277,   281,    288, 

417. 
Trench,  Archbishop,  576. 
Tubingen  Review,  158. 
Turrianus,  Archaeologist,  43,  45,  46. 

Ullman,  Karl,  180. 
Ussher,  Archbishop,  5,  59. 

Valesius,  French  Editor,  52,  177. 

Van  Espen,  11,  12,  20,  36,  66,  67, 
69,  71,  74,  79,  80,  82,  85,  100, 
108,  111,  119,  126,  129,  131, 
132,  133,  140,  147,  149,  150, 
151,  154,  158,  171,  181,  184, 
269,  274,  275,  363,  369,  370, 
372,  373,  377,  379,  386,  387, 
394,  395,  417,  420,  421,  430, 
432,  439,  457,  556,  557,  559, 
561,   563,   566,    567,  568. 

Vasquez,  Gabriel,  xii,  4  n.,  586. 

Veccur,  Patriarch  of  Constantino- 
ple, 167. 

Venables,  Rev.  Edmund,  18,  179. 

Veron,  Rides  of  the  Catholic  Faith, 
xii. 

Versio  prisca,  or  Prisca,  13,  17,  20, 
40,  45,  115,  152,  171,  271,  276, 
278,  280,  416,  425. 

Victor  Vitensis,  273,  279,  283. 

Virgilius,  Pope,  2  n.,  186. 

Vincenzi,  Prof.,  301,  314,  317. 

Voss,  Patristic  Editor,  5. 

Walch,  Prof.   C.  W.  F.,  105,    264, 

314,  316,  414,  583,  586. 
Waterland,  Dr.  Daniel,  6. 
Wesseley,  Archaeologist,  62. 
Westcott,  Bishop  of  Durham,  9,  159. 
Wetzer  and  Welte,  80  n. 
Wilberforce,  Rev.  R.  I. ,  175. 
Wilkins,  Concilia,  270. 
Willmann,  Gustavus,  459. 

Zacharias,  pope,  84. 

Zahn,  Theodore,  5,  146. 

Zonaras,  John,  10,  11,  17,  20,  23,  24, 
28,  30,  35,  45,  64,  80,  82,  99, 
100,  108,  115,  125,  127,  128, 
129,  133,  140,  149,  156,  171, 
178,  181,  184,  231,  235,  272, 
274,  278,  363,  371,  373,  375, 
386,  392,  393,  394,  399,  400, 
417,  421,  423,  432,  457,  516, 
559,  566,    568,   590. 


INDEX   OF  NAMES 


Abraham  Echellensis,  43,  45,  49. 
Abram,  Bp.  of  Batnes,  162. 
Abundantius,  Eoman  legate,  329 ; 

consul,  458. 
Acaeius,  Bp.  of  Berea,  162,  363. 
Acaesius,  Novalian  Bp.  at  Constan- 
tinople, 20. 
Aeepliali,  200. 

Adamantius,  friend  of  Origen,  320. 
Adelphus,    Messalian    writer,    240, 

241. 
Adeodatus  of  Simidiea,  bishop,  504. 
Adrian  I.  (Hadrian),  Pope,  45,  184, 

357,  521,  525,  533,  536,   538, 

576,  578,  579. 
iElian  at  Gangra,  91. 
JEschines,  128. 
iEthereus,  his   signature  at  Antio- 

chean  synod,  124. 
Aetius,  Bp.  of  Thessalonica,  at  Sar- 

dican  Council,  430,  431. 
Aetius,  deacon  of   Constantinople, 

249,     253,    267,    292,     293; 

opened    the    third    session    at 

Chalcedon,  259. 
Agapetus  I.,  Pope,  401. 
Agapius,   claimant   of    the   see   of 

Bostra,  513,  514. 
Agatho  I.,  Pope  of  Rome,  325  seq. 
Agothon,  6. 
Alcuin,  578. 

Alexander  of  Hales,  526. 
Alexander,  Bp.  of  Alexandria,  53, 

54,  208. 
Alexander,  Bp.  of  Antioch,  363. 
Alexander,  Bp.    of   Apamea,  225, 

237. 
Alexander,  Bp.  of  Hierapolis,  225, 

237. 
Alexander  III.,  Pope  of  Rome,  72. 
Alexander,  solitary,  presbyter,  308. 
Alexis  Angelus,  xi. 
Alexis  Aristenus,  xxxiii. 
Alexis  Comnenus,  xxxii,  27. 
Alexius  Aristenus,  184. 
Alexius  Comnenus,  278. 
Alletz,  French  Canonist,  xx. 
Alypius,     Bp.     of    the    Tagastine 

Church,    424,    441,    442,    480, 

486,  503,  504. 
Ambivius,  African  bishop,  480. 
Ambrose,   Milan,   10,   56,  159,  180, 

248,  303. 
Ambrosius,  bishop,  188. 
AmpeliuSj  African  bishop,  480. 
Ampbilochius,  Bp.  of  Iconium,  162, 

240,  361,  605. 
Anastasius,  Bp.  of  Antioch,  179. 
Anastasius,  Bp.  of  Constantinople, 

244,  253,  547,  560. 
Anastasius,  Bp.  of  Jerusalem,  356. 
Anastasius,  Bp.  of  Nicasa,  278. 
Anastasius,  Bp.  of  Rome,  470,  471, 

475. 
Anastasius,    librarian   at  Nice  II., 

536,  581. 
Anastasius,  Presbyter  of  Nestorius, 

208. 


Anastasius,  the  Elder,  335. 
Anatolius,   Bp.   of   Constantinople, 

244,  253. 
Anatolius,    Bp.  of  Constantinople, 

187,    247,   262,  266,  282,  289, 

290. 
Anatolius,  his  signature  to   Antio- 

chean  Synod,  121. 
Anemius,  bishop  in  Synod  in  Rome, 

188. 
Anglebert,  583. 
Anthemius,  consul,  490. 
Anthimus,  34  n. 
Anthimus,  Bp.  of  Tyana,  277. 
Antiochus,  Bp.  of  Samosata,  162. 
Antoninus,    Bp.    of    Ephesus,   was 

couvicted  of  simony,  268. 
Antony,  African  bishop,  509. 
Apergius  of  Perga,  343. 
Apiarius  of  Sicca,  44. 
Apollinaris,    Patr.    of    Alexandria, 

299,  302. 
Apollo,  bishop,  614. 
Apringius,  Bp.  of  Chalcedon,  225. 
Aptus,  African  bishop,  480. 
Arabianus,  Bp.  of  Aneyra,  513. 
Arcadius,  Emperor,  458,  483,  513, 

514. 
Arcadius,  legate   at   Ephesus,    and 

Bp.,  154,  219,  220,  221,  223, 

224,  239. 
Archidamus,   papal   legate   at   Sar- 

dica,  415. 
Aristenus,  Alexis,  xi,  xxxiii,  17,  23, 

276. 
Aristenus,  226. 
Arius,  549. 
Ascholius,  bishop  in  synod  in  Rome, 

188. 
Ascholius,    Bp.    of    Thessalonica, 

180,  181. 
Ascidas,    bishop,    304   [see   Theo- 
dore, Asc.  ]. 
Asclepas,    Bp.    of  Gaza,    deposed, 

414. 
Asellus,  presbyter,   legate   at   Car- 
thage,   441,    443,    506,    506, 

507. 
Asiaticus,  African  bishop  and  dele- 
gate, 503. 
Asseman,  43. 
Athanasius,    5,  IS,  33,   40,  43,  55, 

92,  105,  114,  164,  173,  175,  248, 
253,  303,  361,  540,  545;  can- 
on supposed  to  be  against,  110. 

Atticus,  consul,  458,  470. 

Atticus  of  Constantinople,  44,  112, 

508,  510. 
Attila,  the  Hun,  283. 
Aubespine,  85,  276. 
Augustanus,  Elias  Ehingerus,  235. 
Augusti,  21. 
Augustine  of  Hippo,  25,  28,  37,  92, 

93,  120,  303,  309,  321,  322, 
438,  443,  447,  480,  503,  504; 
his  appointment  to  Ms  see, 
120. 

Aurelian,  Bp.  of  Aries,  303. 


Aurelius,  Bp.  of  Carthage,  439, 
441,  442,  446,  458,  465,470, 
471,  483,  484,  485,  486,  506, 
509. 

Aurelius,  Bp.  of  Irenopolis,  225. 

Aurelius,  African  bishop,  459. 

Aurelius,  Bp.  of  Rome,  440. 

Aurelius,  Emperor,  516. 

Bacchus,  28. 

Bagadius,  claimant   of  the   see  of 

Bostra,  513,  514. 
Ballerini,  436. 
Balsamon,   xxxii,   xxxiii,    17,    20, 

23,  24,  34,  39,  40,  45,  68,  73, 

81,    85,    86,  93,    94,  114,   131, 

152,    171,   184,    276,  283,  357, 

368,    432,   514. 
Baronius,    52,    89,    93,    128,   351, 

436. 
Barsumas,  Syrian,  270. 
Basil,  Bp.  of  Amasea,  78. 
Basil,  Bp.  of  Aneyra,  234. 
Basil,  Bp.  of  Ca:sarea,  25,  71,  127, 

131,  132,  303,  361,380,545, 

567,  583. 
Basil,   Bp.    of  Gortyna,  in   Crete, 

356,  357. 
Basil  at  Gangra,  91. 
Basil  I.,  Emperor,  xxxi. 
Basilides,  Spanish  bishop,  63. 
Basilides,  bishop,  friend  of  Diony- 

sius  of  Alexandria,  600. 
Basilius,  bishop  in  Synod  in  Rome, 

188. 
Basilius    Tricaccabus    of    Pisidia, 

533. 
Bassianus,  59,  273 ;  deprived  of  his 

see  at  Ephesus,  266,  271. 
Bassus    and    Antiochus,    consuls, 

221. 
Bassus  at  Gangra,  91. 
Bassus,  consul,  495. 
Batifol,  159. 
Belisarius,  consul,  304. 
Bellarmine,  35,  52,  351,  436,  526. 
Benedict  VIII.,  Pope,  167. 
Benedict  XIV.,  Pope,  37. 
Benevolus,  28. 
Benignus,  bishop,  304. 
Beronician,  clerk  of  the  consistory, 

253,  260. 
Berti,  436. 
Beveridge,  xvii  seq.,  xxxiii,  17,  18, 

20,  21,  43,  69,  70,  81. 
Bickell,  367,  592,  593. 
Bingham,  Joseph,  32,  71,  132,  154. 
Binius,    Prof.    Severin,    Canonist, 

xix,  93. 
Binterim,  21. 
Birbeck,  W.  J.,  ix. 
Bistus,  priest,  614. 
Bithynicus  at  Gangra,  91. 
Blastares,  Matthew,  xxxiii,  124. 
Bolotoff,  Prof.,  ix. 
Bona,  Cardinal,  32,  135. 
Bonaventura,    Monk    and   Scholar, 

36. 


INDEX   OF  NAMES 


623 


Boniface,  Pope,  44,  45,  442,  454, 

506,  508,  510. 
Boniface  VIII. ,  Pope,  xxxv. 
Boniface,     presbyter     and     legate 

from  Rome,    261,   290,   293, 

509. 
Bosphorus,  Bp.  of  Colonia,  162. 
Bridget  of  Sweden,  St.,  568. 
Britton,  bishop,  188. 
Browne,  Bp.  Harold,  365. 
Bruns,  Herm.  Theod.,  xxi,  45,  497, 

508. 
Bunsen,  German  scholar,  593. 
Bury,  xxix,  523. 

Cabasilas,  34. 

Cabassutius,  John,  xx. 

Caecilian,  Bp.  of  Carthage,  443, 
444. 

Caesarius,  Consul,  458,  470. 

Caldonius,  African  bishop,  518. 

Calvin,  John,  37. 

Candidian,  represented  the  Em- 
perors at  the  Council  of  Eph- 
esus,  196,  226,  227,  228. 

Candidus  of  Abbirita,  bishop,  504. 

Capreolus,  Bp.  of  Carthage,  218. 

Caranza,  Barth. ,  xxi. 

Caroline,  Queen,  285. 

Carosus,  59,  111. 

Cave,  xx,  21. 

Cecilian,  bishop,  44. 

Cecropius,  Bp.  of  Sebastopol,  261, 
277,  349. 

Ceillier,  Remi,  xx,  105,  124,  436. 

Celestine,  African  bishop,  509. 

CelestineL,  Pope,  45,  218,  219, 
220,  509. 

Celestius,  225  seq.,  229,  230. 

Centuriators  of  Magdeburg,  592. 

Cethegus,  consul,  304. 

Ceticius,  African  bishop,  509. 

Charisius,  presbyter  of  Philadel- 
phia, 231,  231,  232. 

Charlemagne,  45,  56,  166,  576,  577, 
578  seq.,  585. 

Charles  VI.,  Emperor,  277. 

Charles  IX  ,  of  France,  36. 

Chrysostom,  John,  Bp.  of  Constanti- 
nople, 30,  33,  52,  114,  132,  281, 
303,  379,  545. 

Chumnus,  Abp.  of  Thessalonica, 
xxxiii. 

Clarus,  African  bishop  and  delegate, 
503. 

Claudius  of  Turin,  585. 

Clement  of  Alexandria,  5,  9,  159. 

Clement  of  Rome,  9,  96. 

Clement  V.,  Pope,  xxxv. 

Clement  VIII.,  Pope,  35,  372  n. 

Columban,  56. 

Constans  III.,  Emperor,  264. 

Constans,  Emperor,  272,  413. 

Constantine,  Bp.  of  Constantia  in 
Cyprus,  539,  581. 

Constantine,  Bp.  of  Leontina,  530. 

Constantine,  Bp.  inPontus,  267. 

Constantine,  Bp.  of  Rome,  357. 

Constantine,  consul,  304,  305. 

Constantine  I.,  Emperor,  xxix,  8, 
28,  105,  536. 

Constantine  IV.  (Pogonatus),  328, 
340,  343,  540. 


Constantine  V.,  Copronymus,  547, 

564,  571. 
Constantine    VI.,    Emperor,    521, 

529,  530,  xxxii. 
Constantine  IX.,  Emperor,  xxxi. 
Constantine,  secretary  at  Constanti- 
nople, 293,  304. 
Constantius,  Bp.  of  Cyprus,  579. 
Constantius,  Emperor,  8,  105,  144, 

272. 
Cornelius,  centurion,  28. 
Cornelius  of  Rome,  9,  20,  36,  144. 
Cosmas,  deacon,  notary  and  cham- 
berlain (cubuclesius),  538. 
Crabbe,    Peter,   Belgian   Canonist, 

xix. 
Crescentian,  African  bishop,  458. 
Cresconius,  Bp.  of  Villa  Regis,  464, 

480,  503. 
Cureton,  415,  433. 
Cyprian,  Bp.  of  Carthage,    14,  29, 

63,  92,  144,  146,  361,  516,  517, 

604. 
Cyriacus,  bishop,   envoy  to  Rome, 

189. 
Cyriacus,  Bp.  of  Cajsarea  in  Cap- 

padocia,  356. 
Cyril,    Alex.,    2   n.,    19,    44,    56, 

192  seq.,  299,  303,  361,  510. 
Cyril,  Bp.  of  Coele,  242,  242. 
Cyril   of  Jerusalem,  92,  128,  162, 

173,  189. 
Cyril  of  Scythopolis,  18. 
Cyril,  bishop  at  the  Conciliabulum, 

225. 
Cyrus,  one  of  Ibas's  priests,  281. 
Cyrus,    Bp.    of    Alexandria,    327, 

336,  343,  353,  582,  615. 

Dadoes,  Messalian  writer,  240. 

Dallaeus,  159. 

Damasus  I.,  22,  33,  161,  169,  173, 
180,  182,  184,  186. 

Damasus  II.,  Pope,  21. 

Damian,  bishop,  302. 

Daniel  the  prophet,  84. 

Daniel,  bishop  at  the  Conciliabulum, 
225. 

Daniel  the  Stylite,  162  n. 

Daniel,  notary  at  Carthage  council, 
441,  443. 

Datian,  African  bishop,  484. 

David  the  King,  84. 

Decius,  Emperor,  516. 

Delarc,  M.  l'abbe,  xxi. 

De  Marca,  18. 

Demetrius  Chomatenus,  34. 

Denziger,  xxi. 

DeRossi,  134. 

Desideratus,  Bp.  of  Verdun,  38. 

Dexianus,  bishop  at  the  Conciliabu- 
lum, 225. 

Dianius,  same  as  Dius,  90. 

Didymus  the  blind,  316. 

Diocletian,  62  n.,  164,  592. 

Diodorus,  Bp.  of  Tarsus,  162, 
609. 

Diogenes,  bishop  at  the  Conciliabu- 
lum, 225. 

Diogenes,  a  lapsed,  62. 

Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  128,  175, 
361,  600. 

Dionysius,  Bp.  of  Diospolis,  162. 


Dionysius  Exiguus,  9, 13,  20,  45, 79, 
85,  99,  101,  113,  117,  152,  154, 
158,  159,  276,  401,  438,  475, 
591. 

Dioscorus,  Bp.  of  Alexandria,  247, 
248,  259,  260,  261,  276,  285, 
344. 

Dioscorus,  papal  legate,  19. 

Dius,  called  President  at  Gangra, 
90. 

Domninus,  Patr.  of  Antioch,  299. 

Domninus,  Bp.  of  Theopolis,  302. 

Domnus,  Metropolitan,  415. 

Domnus,  Patr.  of  Antioch,  281. 

Donatian,  the  Primate,  Senex,  503. 

Donatus,  African  bishop  and  dele- 
gate, 503,  509. 

Donus  (Domnus),  Bp.  of  Rome, 
329. 

Dorotheus,  presbyter  of  Antioch,  8, 
59,  111. 

Drey,  Dr.  Von,  xxxiv  n.,  591,  592, 
593. 

Ducange,  21. 

Dulcicius,  bishop  and  African  leg- 
ate, 487. 

Dulcitius,  notary  from  Pope  Leo, 
258. 

Du  Pin,  xx,  89,  436,  450. 

Eanbald,  Archbishop,  276. 

Ebrard,  174. 

Ecclesius,  Bp.  of  Ravenna,  143. 

Eck,  37  n. 

Edgar,  King,  70,  270. 

Egbert,  Abp.  of  York,  38. 

Ehingeris,  Elias,  235. 

Elfric,  270. 

Elias,  Bp.  of  Jerusalem,  162  n. 

Elias  Ehmger,  45. 

Epictetus,  the  Blessed,  253. 

Epigonius,   African    Bishop,    467, 

468,  470. 
Epiphanius,  reader   and  bishop   at 

Pavia,  279. 
Epiphanius,  Bp.  of  Salamis,  52,101, 

128,  163,  164,  168,  240,  345. 
Epiphanius,  the  deacon,  583. 
Equitius,  African  bishop,  has  been 

condemned,  and   is  to   be   ex- 
pelled, 474,  475,  489. 
Estius,  William,  97. 
Euchologion,  389. 
Eudoxia,  Empress,  285. 
Eudoxius,  Eusebian  delegate,  414. 
Eugenius  at  Gangra,  91. 
Eugenius,  deacon  of  Marcellus,  and 

messenger,  176. 
Eulalius  at  Gangra,  91. 
Eulogius,  priest  of  Ibas,  281. 
Eulogius,  Bp.  of  Alexandria,  179, 

335. 
Eulogius,  Bp.  of  Edessa,  162. 
Eunomius,  Bp.  of  Nicomedia,  278. 
Euphemia,   martyr,   261,  262,  263, 

265. 
Euphrasmius  of  Theopolis,  335. 
Euphrates  of  Cologne,  413. 
Euprepius,   Bp.    of  Biza    (Bizya), 

242,  242. 
Eusebius,   of    Caesarea,  3,    28,  34, 

52,  89,  90,  132,  545. 
Eusebius  of  Cappadoeia,  89,  90. 


624 


INDEX   OF   NAMES 


Eusebius,  bishop,  envoy  to  Rome, 

189. 
Eusebius  of  Constantinople,  89. 
Eusebius,   Bp.   of  Dorylseum,   179, 

187,  259,  288. 
Eusebius  at  Gangra,  91. 
Eusebius  of  Nicomedia,  32. 
Eusebius,  signed  at  Antioch,  121. 
Eustachius,    his    signature    to    the 

Antiochean  Synod,  121. 
Eustathius,    Bp.    of   Berytus,  277, 

290,  291,  310,  566. 
Eustathius,  Bp.  in  Pamphylia,  236. 
Eustathius,  Bp.  of  Antioch,  32,  53, 

414. 
Eustathius,  Bp.  of  Parnassus,  225. 
Eustathius,  Bp.  of  Sebaste,  89,  97. 
Eustathius,  condemned  at  Gangra, 

89,  91. 
Eustochjus,    Patr.    of    Jerusalem, 

299,  302. 
Eutactus,  monk,  89. 
Eutbymius,  abbot  in  Palestine,  263. 
Euthyrius,  Bp.  of  Tyana,  225. 
Eutychius,  Patr.  of  Constantinople, 

299,  302,  321. 
Eutychius,  consul,  470. 
Evagrius,  bishop  in  Cyprus,  234. 
Evagrius,  deacon,  316,  344,  360. 
Evangelus,  African  bishop,  480. 
Evarestus,  28,  293. 
Evodius  (Euodius),  African  bishop, 

480,  488,  495. 
Ezechiel,  the  prophet,  84. 

Eabian,  Bp.  of  Rome,  145. 
Eabius,  Bp.  of  Antioch,  9. 
Fabricius,  Johannes  Albert,  xx,  45. 
Eaustinus,    Bp.    of   Potentia,    441, 

442,  443,  445,  503,  506,  506, 

507. 
Felicianus,  African  bishop,  486. 
Felix  III.,  Pope,  187,  xiii. 
Fermilian,  one  of  the  ancients,  604. 
Ferrandus,  475. 
Ffoulkes,    Edmund   Salusbury,    43 

n.,  89,  95. 
Firmilian  of  Caasarea,  128. 
Flabius  Stilico,  consul,  470. 
Flavian,  Bp.  of  Antioch,  189,  233, 

512. 
Flavian,    Bp.     of    Constantinople, 

247,    248,    253,  254,  281,  288, 

303,  310,  345. 
Flavian,  Bp.  of  Philippi,  218,  220. 
Flavian,  Montanist,  bishop,  186. 
Flavius  Eucherius,  consul,  172. 
Flavius  Evagrius,  consul,  172. 
Fleury,  Claude,  xxi,  20,  73,  81,  436. 
Florentius,     African     bishop     and 

legate,  495. 
Florentius,  Bp.  of  Sardis,  249. 
Florus,  inclined  to  heresy,  239. 
Fortunatian,    African    bishop    and 

legate,  495,  503,  509. 
Fortunatian,  Bp.  of  Naples,  503. 
Fortunatus,    African   bishop,    480, 

491,  509. 
Francis  de  Sales,  98. 
Fritilas,  Bp.  of  Heraclea,  225,  242. 
Fronton  le  Due,  575. 
Fulgentius  of  Ruspe,  401. 
Fulgentius  Ferrandus,  69. 


Fuchs,   George    Daniel,    xxi,    100, 

130. 
Fullo,  Peter,  400. 
Fulton,  Rev.   Dr.   John,   viii,    xxi, 

365. 
Funk,  367,  593. 

Gabriel,  an  angel,  150. 

Gabriel  of  Pentapolis,  389. 

Gabriel  d'Aubespine,  Bp.  of  Or- 
leans, 592. 

Gaiseric,  the  Vandal,  282. 

Galerius,  the  Emperor,  62  n. 

Gallonian  of  Utica,  bishop,  504. 

Gamurrini,  transcript  of  Peregri- 
natio  Salvm,  136. 

Gamier,  207. 

Gaudentius,  Bp.  at  Sardica,  420, 
431. 

Gelasius,  Bp.  of  Csesarea  in  Pales- 
tine, 162. 

Gelasius  of  Cyzicus,  29,  40,  44,  51, 
52. 

Genebrardus,  584. 

Genethlius,  Bp.  of  Carthage,  446. 

Gennadius,  Bp.  of  Constantinople, 
361,  615. 

George,  Patr.  of  Antioch,  356. 

George,  Bp.  of  Constantinople,  326, 
328,  342,  343. 

George  of  Laodicea,  9. 

George,  bishop,  302. 

George,  Papal  Legate,  38. 

George,  presbyter  and  legate  from 
Jerusalem,  326,  329,  350. 

Gess,  174. 

Geta,  African  bishop,  486. 

Gibbon,  Edw.,  523,  575. 

Glubokoffski,  Prof.,  ix. 

Goar,  Eucho/ogion,  285. 

Goschlerand,  M.  l'abbe,  xxi. 

Gothfried  (Gothofredus),  Jacob,  16. 

Grabe,  John  E. ,  603  n. 

Gratian  (Emp.  of  the  West),  10,  21, 
79,  161  n.,  181,  333. 

Gratray,  Pere,  351. 

Gratus,  Bp.  of  Carthage,  421,  422, 
430. 

Gregory  at  Gangra,  91. 

Gregory  the  Great,  xv,  38,  179,  186, 
187,  268,  271,  431,  525. 

Gregory  of  Naz.,  14,  34.  131,  162, 
177,  180,  206,  273,  277,  286,565. 

Gregory  of  Nyss.,  25,  37,  162,  248, 
303,  361,  512,  583. 

Gregory  Thaum.,  xxxiii,  25,  303, 
361,  579,  602. 

Gregory  Theologus,  361. 

Gregory  II.,  Pope,  575. 

Gregory  III.,  Pope,  93. 

Gregory  IX.,  Pope,  xxxv. 

Gregory  XIII.,  Pope,  xxxv. 

Gregory  or  Gregorian,  Roman  ju- 
rist, xxix. 

Gueranger,  Dom  Prosper,  Institu- 
tions Liturgiques,  135,  159. 

Haddon,  A.  W.,  21,  34. 
Hadrian,  the  Emperor,  xxix. 
Hadrian,  Pope.    [See  Adrian.] 
Hammond,    W.    A.,    xxi,    21,    94, 

276. 
Hardouin,  xx,  44,  263. 


Harmenopulus,  Constantine,  xxxiii, 
23,  74. 

Harnack,  14  n. ,  593. 

Hefele,  xxi,  17,  21,  40,  64,  73,  75, 
81,85,105,  106,200,  281. 

Helen,  mother  of  the  Emperor  Con- 
stantine, 536. 

Helladius,  Bp.  of  Caesarea  Capp., 
162. 

Helladius,  Bp.  of  Ptolemais,  225. 

Helladius,  Bp.  of  Tarsus,  225. 

Henry  II.  of  Germany,  167. 

Henry  III.  of  France,  36. 

Henry  V.  of  England,  568. 

Henry  VIII.  of  England,  367-368. 

Heraclius  (Augustus),  328,  340. 

Herbst,  65. 

Hermant,  xx. 

Hermes,  Messalian  writer,  240. 

Hermogenes,  Roman  jurist,  xxix. 

Hervetus,  73,  276,  283. 

Hesychius,  his  signature  to  the  An- 
tiochean synod,  121. 

Hesychius,  Bp.  of  Castabala  in  Cili- 
cia,  225,  592. 

Hierax,  clergyman,  614. 

Hilarus,  deacon  and  legate  of  Leo, 
258. 

Hilary  of  Aries,  282. 

Hilary  of  Horrea-Cascilia,  bishop, 
504. 

Hilary  of  Poitiers,  105,  303. 

Hilary,  Roman  Archdeacon,  56,  248. 

Himerius,  Bp.  of  Nicomedia,  225. 

Hincmar,  Abp.  of  Rheims,  45. 

Hippolytus,  9. 

Honoratus,  African  bishop,  480. 

Honoratus,  African  bishop,  459, 
464,  465,  466,  480. 

Honorius,  Alex.,  deacon,  273. 

Honorius,  Bp.  of  Rome.  327,  328, 
342,  343. 

Honorius,  Emperor,  458,  470,  483, 
488,  495,  496,  503,  509,  513. 

Hoogstriiten,  37  n. 

Hormisdas,  Pope,  401,  592. 

Hosius,  Bp.  of  Cordova,  xiii,  51, 
89,  90,  415. 

Hoskins,  Rev.  Leighton,  ix. 

Hunneric,  Vandal  King,  273. 

Hydruntinus,  Nicolas,  xi. 

Hypatius  at  Gangra,  91. 

Ibas,  Bp.  of  Edessa,  268,  286,  299. 
Ignatius,  Bp.  of  Antioch,  39,  96. 
Innocent  I.,  Pope,  16,  24,  43,  159, 

363,  493. 
Innocent  II.,  Pope,  367. 
Innocent  III.,  Pope,  179. 
Innocent,  Presbyter  of  Alexandria, 

508,  510. 
Irenseus,  a  digamist,  was  ordained 

Bishop  of  Tyre,  363. 
Irenseus,  Bp.  of  Lyons,  4,  132. 
Irenaeus,   Count,  friend    of   Nesto- 

rius,  226. 
Irene,    Empress,   521,    529,    530, 

548,  571,  577. 
Ischyrion,  276. 
Isidore    Mercator,    xxxiv,    39,    80, 

85,  98,  101,  111,  113,  118,  154, 

276. 
Isidore  of  Pelusium,  268- 


INDEX   OF  NAMES 


625 


Isidore  of  Seville,  xxxiv. 
Isidorus,  Bp.  of  Cyrus,  162. 

James  of  Nisibis,  43. 

James,    the    Lord's    brother    and 

bishop  of  Jerusalem,  380. 
Januarius,    a    bishop    at    Sardican 

council,  429,  429. 
Januarius,    African    bishop,    480, 

509,  518. 
Janus  mid  the  Council,  351. 
Jeremiah  the  prophet,  84. 
Jerome,  St.,  52,  92,  173,  580. 
Jesus  Christ,  84. 

Jocundus,  African  bishop  and  dele- 
gate, 503,  504. 
Jocundus  of  Sufetula,  504. 
John  Baptist,  84. 

John,    Bp.    of  Antioch,    101,    159, 
192,  200,  225,  238,  242,    250, 
291,  582. 
John,      Bp.      of      Constantinople 

(Chrysostom),  303. 
John,  Bp.  of  Damascus,  225,  546. 
John,  Bp.  of   Justinianopolis,  356, 

383. 
John,  Bp.  in  Pontus,  267. 
John,  Bp.  of  Portus,  326,  329. 
John,  Bp.  of  Scythopolis,  335. 
John,  Bp.  of  Sebaste,  295. 
John,    Bp.    of    Thessalonica,    326, 

329. 
John,  bishop,  papal  legate,  329. 
John,  bishop   and  legate  at  Mcasa 

II.,  535. 
John  II.,  Pope,  105,  401. 
John  VIII.,  Pope,  357. 
John  XXII.,  Pope,  xxxv. 
John,  Copt.  Patriarch,  43. 
John  Damascene,  165,  168,  209. 
John,    deacon   and   Roman   legate, 

326,  329,  350. 
John  the  Evangelist,  30,  203. 
John,  logothete  at  Nicaea  II.,  537. 
John,  monk,  presbyter   and  repre- 
sentative of  the  Eastern   high 
priests,  539. 
John,  solitary  and  presbyter,  308. 
John  Talaia,  286. 

John,  the  Grammarian,  Bp  of  Con- 
stantinople, 576. 
John  Tilius,  45. 
Johnson,  Rev.  John,  xxi,  450. 
Jonas  of  Orleans,  585. 
Josephus  iEgypt. ,  30. 
Jovian,  272 
Jubaianus,  African  bishop  opposed 

to  Cyprian,  517. 
Julian,  Bp.  of  Eclanum,  230. 
Julian,  African  bishop,  468. 
Julian,  Emperor,  112,  275. 
Julian  Cassarini,  Cardinal,  587. 
Julian,  inclined  to  heresy,  239. 
Julius  I.,  Pope,  105,  106,  415. 
Julius,  Bishop  and  Legate  of  Leo, 

258. 
Justellus,  canonist,  xix,  16,  283. 
Justin  Martyr,  14. 
Justin  II. ,  Pope,  323. 
Justina,  Empress,  28. 
Justinian  I.,  xxix,  34,  43,  86,  177, 
187,  300,  335,  360,  367,   390, 
435. 

VOL.   XIV. 


Justinian  II.,  Emperor,   356,  401, 

540. 
Justinus,  consul,  304. 
Juvenal,  Bp.  of  Jerusalem,  18,  19, 

192,  219,  223,  266. 

Keble,  Rev.  John,  135  n. 
Krebs,  German  archaeologist,  62. 
Kyradium,  a  woman  repelled  from 
communion,  614. 

Labbe,  canonist,  xix,  xx. 

Laetus,  notary  at  Carthage,  487. 

Lambert,  William,  xxi,  94. 

Larsow,  Prof.,  413. 

Launoy,  French  writer,  15. 

Laurence  of  Icosium,  bishop,  504. 

Leo,  the  Isaurian,  an  Iconoclast, 
564. 

Leo  of  Mocta,  bishop,  504. 

Leo,  presbyter,  imperial  messenger, 
538. 

Leo  I.,  Pope,  2,  18,  19,  22,  43,  56, 
179,  186,  187,  253,  266,  299, 
303,  363. 

Leo  II.,  Pope,  352. 

Leo  III.,  Pope,  22,  166,  167,  232. 

Leo  IV.,  Pope,  105,  124. 

Leo  IX.,  Pope,  179. 

Leo  III.,  Emperor,  xxxi. 

Leo  VI.,  Emperor,  xxxi,  xxxii. 

Leontius,  Bp.  of  Magnesia,  59. 

Leontius,  Bp.  at  Chalcedon,  116. 

Leontius,  presb.  at  Antioch,  8  n. 

Leontius  of  Byzantium,  263. 

Leontius  Castratus,  Bp.  of  Anti- 
och, 414. 

Liberalis,  African  bishop,  518. 

Librius,  Pope,  414. 

Licinius,  24,  28. 

Liddon,  Bampt.  Led.,  135. 

Lightfoot,  Bp.  of  Durham,  523. 

Littledale,  Dr.,  80  n.,  351. 

Longfellow,  Henry  Wadsworth, 
135  n. 

Lothar,  Colleague,  Emperor,  277. 

Louis,  St.,  36,  277. 

Louis  the  Pious,  277. 

Lucentius,  papal  legate  at  Chalce- 
don, 179,  245,  247,  248,  260, 
261,  289,  290,  292. 

Lucian,  African  bishop  and  dele- 
gate, 486. 

Ludlow,  I.  M.,  72. 
Liift,  158. 

Lupus,  Samuel,  xx,  52. 
Luther,  Martin,  37,  92  n. 
Lyndwood,  xxix. 

Maasen,  Dr.,  16. 

Macarius,   Bp.    of    Antioch,    342, 

344,  353. 
Macarius,  Bp.  of  Laodicea  Magna, 

225. 
Macarius,  African  Martyr,  496. 
Macedonius,  signed  at  Antiochean 

synod,  121. 
Maffei,  Scipio,  37,  413,  592,  593. 
M'Garvey,  Rev.  Wm.,  ix. 
Mamachi,  Dominican  writer,  413. 
Mansi,  Archbishop,  xx,  45,  436. 
Manuel,  Patr.  of  Constantinople,  34. 
Maras,  priest  of  Ibas,  281. 

S  S 


Marcellian,  inclined  to  heresy,  239. 
Marcellus,  Bp.  of  Ancyra,  62,  163. 
Marcellus,  subdeacon  of  Carthage, 

508,  510. 
Marcian,   Emperor,  262,  270,  277, 

282,  359,  360. 
Marcus,  Pope,  43. 
Marcus  Aurelius,  28. 
Maria  Theresa,  277. 
Marianus,     Uzipparensis,     bishop. 

503. 
Marinus,  28. 
Maris  the  Persian,  2  n.,  200,  299, 

303,  309. 
Mark,  Patr.  of  Alexandria,  xxxiii. 
Mark,  St.,  29. 
Martial,  Spanish  bishop,  63. 
Martin,  African  bishop,  509. 
Martin  Bracarensis,   93,    117,  118, 

121,  156,  157,  159. 
Martin,  Pope,  93,  118. 
Martinian,  a  solitary,  presbyter,  308. 
Martinianus,  oeconomus,  286. 
Martyrius,  Bp.  of  Antioch,  185. 
Martyrius,  Eusebian  delegate,  414. 
Maternus,  African  bishop,  480. 
Maurentius,  African  bishop,  493. 
Mauricius,    his     signature    to    the 

Antiochean  synod,  121. 
Maxentius,  the  Emperor,  62  n. 
Maximian,  Bp.  of  Aquas,  504. 
Maximian,  Emperor,  51,  62  n. 
Maximian  the  younger,   Emperor, 

xxix. 
Maximianus,  successor  of  Nestorius 

at  Constantinople,  195. 
Maximilian,  20,  28. 
Maximin,  62. 

Maximin,  Bp.  of  Anazarbus,  225. 
Maximin  II.,  Emperor,  63. 
Maximinian,    Bp.    of    Vagai,    dis- 
missed from  his  see,  485. 
Maximus,  Bp.  of   Antioch,  19,  248, 

266. 
Maximus   the   Cynic,  Bp.  of   Con- 
stantinople,  177,  179,  180,  186. 
Maximus,  Bp.  of  Jerusalem,  18. 
Maximus,  priest  and  solitary,  308. 
Maximus,  614,  638. 
Meletian  schism,  162,  177,  181,  182. 
Meletius,  Bp.  of  Antioch,  162,  177, 

181-2. 
Meletius,  Bp.  of  Neocassarea.  225. 
Memnon,  Bp  of  Ephesus,  226,  227, 

228. 
Mendham,  John,  xxi. 
Mennas,    Abp.    of    Constantinople, 

219,  301. 
Merlin,    James,    French    canonist, 

xix. 
Michael,  an  angel,  150. 
Michael,    Patr    of  Constantinople, 

34,  389. 
Michael  III.,  Emperor  of  the  East, 

179. 
Michaud,  xiv  n.,  523. 
Miletius  of  Lycopolis,  15,  34. 
Milman,  Dean,  548. 
Mitter-Miiller,  93. 
Modestinus,      Herennius,     Roman 

jurist,  xxix. 
Mongus,  Peter,  285. 
Montfaucon,  45. 


G26 


INDEX   OF  NAMES 


Morinus,  Henricus,  21,  25,  42,  131. 
Muirhead,  Mr.,  on  the  Roman  law, 

xxix. 
Mullen,  Bp.  of  Erie,  U.  S.  A.,  603  n. 
Musaeus,  bishop,  431. 
Mysaeus,  Bp.  of  Aradus,  225. 

Narcissus,  his   signature   at  Antio- 

chean  Synod,  121. 
Narcissus  of  Jerusalem,  17. 
Natalis,  Alexander,  52,  436. 
Neander,  130,  132,  264,  436. 
Nectarius,  Patr.  of  Constantinople. 

27,   126,    186,    189,   286,    512, 

513. 
Nicephorus  of  Jerusalem,  xxxiii. 
Nicetas,      signed      at     Antiochean 

synod,  121. 
Nicetius,  bishop  of  the  first  See  of 

Mauretania  Sitifensis,  483. 
Nicholas,  Pope,  22,  23,  179. 
Nicholas  Hydruntinus,  226. 
Ninellus    of    Rusucarrum,    bishop, 

504. 
Novatus,  Bp.,  legate  of  Mauretania 

Sitifensis,  442,  504. 
Numerian   of   Rusgnnium,    bishop, 

504. 
Numidius,    Bp.    of    Maxula,    446, 

486. 

Olympias,  friend  of  St.  Chrysostom, 

275. 
Olympius  at  Gangra,  91. 
Olympius,  bishop  at  the  Concilia- 

bulum,  225. 
Optatus,  African  bishop,  509. 
Optimus,  Bp.  of  Antioch  in  Pisidia, 

162. 
Origen,  4,  8,  301,  314  seq.,  359  seq. 
Orontius,  inclined  to  heresy,  239. 
Orsi,  archaeologist,  436. 
Otreius,  Bp.  of  Melitina,  162. 

Palatinus,  African  bishop,  509. 

Palladius,  Bp.  of  Amasea,  199. 

Palma,  John  Bapt. ,  436. 

Palmer,  Sir  W.,  524,  578,  579,  581. 

Pammachius,  275. 

Pamphilus  Martyr,  4. 

Panuph,  deacon,  614. 

Paphnutius,  51  seq.,  93. 

Pappus  at  Gangra,  91. 

Paregorius,  presbyter  and  solitary, 

308. 
Parmenides,  6. 
Paschasinus,  Bp.  of  Lilybaeum,  17, 

56,  245,   247,  259,  260,   261, 

266,   289,  290,  291,  292,  292, 

293. 
Pastillas,  Bp.  of  Perga,  547. 
Patrick  (Peter),  bishop  in  Pontus, 

267. 
Paul  of  Antioch,  Eustathian,  182. 
Paul,  Bp.  of  Emissa,  225. 
Paul  of  Samosata,  4,  5,  40,  46,  516. 
Paul,  advocate  of  Constantinople, 

268. 
Paul,  Bp.   of  Constantinople,  327, 

337,  343,  353,  356,  357,  531. 
Paul,  presbyter  and  Roman  legate, 

537,538,  539. 
Paul,  St.,  9,  41,  42,  84. 


Paul  VIII.,  Pope,  xix. 

Paulinus,  Bp.  of  Antioch,  162  n. 

Paulus,  his  signature  to  the  Anti- 
ochean Synod,  121. 

Pelagius,  Bp.  of  Laodicea,  162. 

Pelagius  I.,  Bp.  of  Rome,  323. 

Pelagius  II.,  Bp.  of  Rome,  186,  187. 

Penacchi,  351. 

Pentadius,  Bp.  of  Carpi,  504. 

Percival,  Dr.  H.  A.,  xxi. 

Petavius,  200,  213,  578. 

Peter,  Apostle,  203. 

Peter,  Bp.  of  Alexandria,  177,  180, 
181. 

Peter,  Patr.  of  Alexandria,  356, 
601. 

Peter  of  Antioch,  169. 

Peter,  Bp.  of  Constantinople,  327, 
337,  343,  353. 

Peter,  Bp.  of  Sebaste,  162. 

Peter,  Bp.  of  Trajanopolis,  225. 

Peter,  presbyter  and  Roman  legate, 
537,  538,  539. 

Peter,  presbyter  and  primicerius,  of 
Alexandria,  197,  199. 

Peter,  presbyter  and  legate  from 
Alexandria,  326. 

Peter  Damian,  167. 

Peter  de  Marca,  436,  562. 

Peter  Lombard,  36. 

Phileas,  bishop,  592. 

Philetus  at  Gangra,  91. 

Philip,  Bp.  of  Theodosia,  225. 

Philip,  presbyter  and  legate  of  Car- 
thage, 441,  443,  506,  506,  507. 

Philip,  priest,  was  legate  at  Ephe- 
sus,  194,  195,  219,  221,  223, 
224,  239. 

Philip,  consul,  495. 

Philip  IV.  of  France,  36. 

Phillips,  16,  17,  52. 

Philo,  28,  293. 

Philologius,  African  bishop,  486. 

Philostorgius,  28,  175. 

Philoxenus,  papal  legate  at  Sardica, 
415. 

Phocas,  bishop,  304. 

Phoebe,  41. 

Photius,  Bp.  of  Constantinople, 
xxxii,  45,  101,  167,  180  n., 
184,  235,  586,  587. 

Photius,  Bp.  of  Tyre,  277,  290, 
291,  310. 

Pisanus,  Jesuit,  43. 

Placian,  African  bishop,  480. 

Plautius,  African  bishop  and  dele- 
gate, 503. 

Plumptre,  Edw.  H.,  32. 

Polius,  bishop  at  the  Conciliabulum, 
225. 

Polychronius,  Bp.  of  Heracleopolis, 
225. 

Polychronius,  Monothelite,  343, 
353. 

Polycrates,  9. 

"  Pope  Martin's  Council,"  120. 

Possidonius  of  Calama,  bishop  and 
delegate,  504. 

Praesidius,  inclined  to  heresy,  239. 

Praetextatus  of  Sicily,  bishop,  504. 

Prapidius,  chorepiscopus  and  war- 
den of  hospital,  273. 

Praylius,  Bp.  of  Jerusalem,  18,  363. 


Prisca  or  Priscilla,  friend  of  Mon- 

tanus,  128,  186. 
Priscianus,  bishop,  envoy  to  Rome, 

189. 
Proterius,  Patr.  of  Alexandria  and 

formerly  CEconomus,  56,  286. 
Proasresius  at  Gangra,  91. 
Proclus,    Bp.    of    Constantinople, 

303,  310,  363. 
Projectus,   legate  at  Ephesus,  and 

bishop,    194,    219,    220,   221, 

223,  224,  239. 
Prudentius,  hymn  writer,  159. 
Pulcheria,  Empress,  262,  289. 
Puller,  F.  W.,  113,  518. 
Pusey,  Rev.  Dr.  E.  B.,  xxi. 
Pyrrhus,    Bp.    of    Constantinople, 

327,  336,  343,  353. 

Quesnel,  P.,  94. 
Quintin,  John,  xxxii. 
Quodvultdeus,  Bp.  of  Carthage,  283. 
Quodvultdeus,  African  bishop,  480. 
Quodvultdeus,  Bp.  of  Veri,  504. 

Rainer,  Archduke,  62. 
Raphael,  an  Angel,  150. 
Raymond  of  Pennafort,  St.,  xxxv. 
Reatus,    presbyter   and    legate    of 

Leo,  258. 
Recarede,  King,  178. 
Reginus,    Bp.    of    Vegesela,    459, 

480. 
Remigius,  Bp.  of  Dorchester,  281. 
Restitutus,  African  bishop  and  dele- 
gate, 495,  503. 
Revillout,  Eugene,  2  n. 
Rheginus,  Bp.  of  Cyprus,  234. 
Richard,  Charles  Ludovic,  xx. 
Richer,  xx,  414,  435. 
Rodolph,  Abp.  of  Bourges,  22. 
Rogation,  African  bishop,  480. 
Rohrbacher,  351,  436. 
Rivington,  Rev.  Luke,  219  n. 
Roman    Correctors,    111,  115,   116, 

117,    118,    119,    131,  141,  147, 

152,  564. 
Romanus,  J.  B.,  43. 
Routh,  21,  24,  64,  65,  09,  70,  73,  81. 
Ruffianus,  Bp.  of  Muzuba,  504. 
Ruffinus,   Christian  writer,    15,   16, 

17. 
Rufinus,  12,  15,  17,  44,  52. 
Rufinus,  Praetoreal  Prefect,  512. 
Rumoridus,  consul,  486. 
Rusticus,  Roman  deacon  condemned 

by  Vigilius,  302. 
Ruttenstock,  436. 

Sabas,  Messalian  writer,  240,  241. 

Sabbas,  hegumenos  of  the  monas- 
tery of  the  Studium,  535. 

Sabinus,  Bp.  of  Heraclea,  xxx. 

Sacharelli,  436. 

Sallust,  Bp.  of  Corycus  in  Cilicia, 
225. 

Salmasius  (Saumaise),  15,  16,  17. 

Salmatia,  Antonius,  xxxiii. 

Salmon,  Dr.  Francis,  xx,  xxi. 

Salvia,  her  journey  to  the  Holy 
Places,  136. 

Samuel,  priest  of  Ibas,  281. 

Sanborn,  Rev.  F.  A.,  ix. 


INDEX   OF  NAMES 


627 


Schaff,  Dr.  Philip,  173,  174. 

Schelstraten,  F.  Emmanuel,  105. 

Schoell,  xxx,  xxxi. 

Sebastian,  Roman  deacon,  con- 
demned by  Vigilius,  302,  303. 

Sergius,  Bp.  of  Constantinople, 
327,  336,  342,  343,  353. 

Sergius,  Bp.  of  Rome,  357. 

Servus  Dei,  Roman  subdeacon,  304. 

Servus-dei,  African  bishop,  509. 

Severian,  African  bishop  and  dele- 
gate, 503. 

Severus,  African  Martyr,  496. 

Severus,  Alexander,  the  Emperor, 
xxix 

Shann,  G.  V.,  133  n.,  390. 

Sidonius  Apollinaris,  38. 

Silvanus,  African  delegate,  486. 

Simeon,  Abp.  of  Thessalonica,  34, 
389,  390. 

Simeon,  Messalian  writer,  240. 

Simon  Magus,  353. 

Simplician,  African  priest,  463. 

Siricius,  African  priest,  463. 

Siricius,  Pope,  363. 

Siricius,  Roman  notary,  219. 

Sirmond,  Jesuit,  xix,  16,  45. 

Sisinnius,  Pastillas  of  Perga,  533. 

Sixtus  IV. ,  xxxv. 

Socrates,  Eccl.  Hist.,  3,  51,  52,  105. 

Solomon,  the  King,  84. 

Sophronius,  Bp.  of  Jerusalem, 
343. 

Sozomen,  Eccl.  Hist.,  51,  52. 

Spittler,  414. 

Spyridion,  Cypr. ,  bishop,  270. 

Stephen,  bishop,  302,  344,  353. 

Stephen,  Bp.  of  Antioch,  401,  414. 

Stephen,  Bp.  of  Corinth,  326. 

Stephen,  bishop,  friend  of  Diony- 
sius  Exiguus,  591. 

Stephen,  bishop,  deprived  of  his 
jurisdiction,  266,  271. 

Stephen,  Papal  legate,  584. 

Stephen,  Pope,  517. 

Stephen,  St. ,  86. 

Stephanus,  59. 

Stilico,  consul,  490. 

Stolberg,  436. 

Sulpicius  Severus,  56. 

Surius,  patristia,  Editor,  xix,  497. 

Swainson,  The  Creeds,  4. 

Sylvester,  Pope,  1. 

Symmachus,  Pope,  90,  95. 

Synesius,  52. 

Tarasius,  Patr.   of    Constantinople, 

356,  533,  535,  537,  538,  540. 
Tarcodimantus,    his     signature     to 

Antiochean  Synod,  121. 
Tenasius,    Bp.    of    Constantinople, 

357. 
Terentius,  African  bishop,  509. 
Tertullian,    4,  30,  41,  128,  186. 
Thalassius  of  Caasarea,  19,  248. 
Thearistus,      translator       of      the 

Canons,  40,  44. 
Theasius,    African     bishop,     480, 

495,  509. 


Theilo,  40,  44. 
Theodebert,  King,  38,  44. 
Theodora,  Empress,  301,  383,  576. 
Theodore,  Abp.  of  Canterbury,  38, 

341. 
Theodore,  Bp.  of  Catanea,  538. 
Theodore,  Bp.    of  Constantinople, 

351,  353. 
Theodore,    Bp.    of    Marcianopolis, 

225. 
Theodore,  Bp.  of  Jerusalem,  234. 
Theodore,  Bp.  of  Mopsuestia,  211, 

230,  231,    234,   299,    302,  512. 
Theodore,     Bp.    of    Pharon,    327, 

336,  343,  344,  353. 
Theodore,  Bp.  in  Pamphylia,  236. 
Theodore,  Bp.  of  Mitylene,  342. 
Theodore,  Bp.  of  Myra,  534. 
Theodore,  bishop,  304. 
Theodore,  signer  at  Antioch,  121. 
Theodore,     presbyter     and    legate 

from  Jerusalem,  326. 
Theodore,  presbyter,    legate   from 

Ravenna,  329,  350. 
Theodore  Ascidas,  Bp.  of  Cassarea 

in  Capp.,  314. 
Theodore  Studita,  576  n. 
Theodoret,  Bp.  of  Cyrus,  3,  5,  206, 

213,  225,  299,  302,  303,  344, 

363. 
Theodosius,  Bp.  of  Ephesus,  547. 
Theodosius  I. ,  Emperor,  19,  55, 130, 

161,   180,  181,   189,  281,  287, 

310. 
Theodosius    II.,     196,     359,   360, 

458,  486,  495,  496,  503. 
Theodosius,  the  humble  Christian, 

534. 
Theodotus  of  Ancyra,  545. 
Theophanes,   Bp.   of  Philadelphia, 

225. 
Theophanes,  575. 
Theophanus,  Patriarch  of  Antioch, 

343. 
Theophilus,     Bp.    of    Alexandria, 

180,  303,317,  361,  512. 
Theophilus,  Bp.  of  Constantinople, 

575. 
Theophilus  of  Caesarea,  17. 
Theophylact,  Papal  legate,  38. 
Theophylact,  papal  legate,  584. 
Thomas,  Abp.  of  York,  281. 
Thomas  Aquinas,  36,  526. 
Thomassinus,    Lud.,    xxi,    21,    23, 

26,  42,  52. 
Tiberius  (Augustus),  323,  340. 
Tigris,  presbyter  in  Constantinople, 

8. 
Tillemont,    historical    writer,    124, 

200,  436,  512. 
Timotheus,  Chorepiscopus,  21. 
Timothy,  Abp.  of  Alexandria,   127, 

361. 
Timothy  Salophaeiolus,  285. 
Totus,  African  bishop,  509. 
Trajan,  Bp.  of  Augusta,  225. 
Trench,  Abp.,  547. 
Turner,  C.  H.,  593. 
Turrianus,  43,  592. 


Ulpian,  Roman  jurist,  xxix. 

Ultzen,  593. 

Uranius,  Bp.  of  Himeria,  281. 

Urban  III.,  Pope,  72. 

Urban,   African  bishop,  459,   464, 

465,  466,  480,  506. 
Urbanus,   Bp.   of  Mauritania  Siti- 

fensis,  463. 

Valens,  Emperor,  277. 

Valens,  28,  164,  172. 

Valentine,  Bp.  of  Mutloblaca,  225. 

Valentine,   Bp.  of  Numidia,    506, 

508. 
Valentinian,  28. 
Valentinian  III.,  xxix. 
Valentinian,  Bp.  of  Scythia,  303. 
Valentinus,  164. 
Valerian,  Bp.  of  Iconium,  240. 
Valerianus,     bishop    in    synod    in 

Rome,  188. 
Valerius,  African  bishop,  480. 
Valesius,  52. 
Van  Espen,  xxi,  12,  20,  36,  40,  64, 

70,  73,  79,   81,  92,  93,  94,  97, 

116,  120,  126,  134,  159,  368. 
Vasquez,  4  n.,  586. 
Venables,  Canon,  89  n. 
Venerius,  Bp.  of  Milan,  470,  471. 
Venustianus,  African  bishop,  486. 
Victor  of  Aquitaine,  56. 
Victor,  African  bishop,  put  to  death 

by  the  pagans,  495. 
Victor,  Pope,  17,  132. 
Victorian,  African  bishop,  480. 
Vigilius.  Pope,  2,  187,  219,  299  seq. , 

317! 
Vincent  of  Capua,  413. 
Vincent,  African  bishop,  470,  491, 

503,  509. 
Visigoths,  the,  282. 
Vitalis,  Bp.  of  Antioch,  62. 
Vitus,  Bp.  of  Carres,  162. 

Walch,  Christian  Wilhelm  Franz, 

xx.  414. 
Westcott,  Bp.  of  Durham,  9. 
Wetzer,  Prof.  Dr.,  413. 
Wilson,  bishop,  285. 

Xantippus,  bishops'  tractory,  senex, 

486,  493. 
Xantippus,  bishop  of  the  first  see  of 

Numidia,  483,  484. 
Xiphilin,  John,  jurist,  xxxi. 

Zacharias,  Pope,  105. 

Zachary  (a.d.  745),  150. 

Zeno,  Bp.  in  Cyprus,  234. 

Zeno,  Bp.  of  Maiuma,  270. 

Zoilus,  Bp.  of  Alexandria,  336. 

Zonaras,  John,  10,  17,  20,  23,  24, 
29,  30,  39,  40,  45,  64,  73,  81, 
83,  85,  86,  93,  100,  152,  171, 
276,  283,  368,  432,  514. 

Zosimus,  presbyter,  268. 

Zosimus,  Pope,  43  n.,  44,  230,  435, 
441,  506. 

Zosys,  Bp.  of  Esbus,  225. 


S  S  2 


INDEX    OF    WORDS    AND    PHRASES 


hBuLoTus,  Pia.crdij.evos,  280. 

absidem,  462 

ayewqTos,  4,  5. 

a.yhvr)To%,  4,  5,  6,  7. 

'dyia,  sancta,  132. 

ayvoxTTOvs,  avayvticrovs,  278. 

aSia<p6pas,  29. 

aKOwfizvos,  26. 

Sktkttos,  4. 

a.\oyevad.ixsvoi,  70,  71. 

aAoy/ai,  149. 

&\oyos,  174. 

ivafiacns,  34. 

aea<popas,  327. 

afayvaicrreov    ayivrjTos  tout'    eari    jurj 

iroir]6eis,  5. 
hva\T)(p8ivTa,  214. 

angelos  or  angidos,  150. 

av9pa>ir6deos,  174 

&v8poiiros  SeocpSpos,  174. 

avfrpwirordKov,  313. 

anima  animans,  174. 

anima  rationalis,  174. 

animate  peccatwn,  10. 

Anomoion,  175. 

aj/TfSaipa,  132. 

avrtpevcna,  560. 

oireTolafTO.  iirerd^avTO,  271. 

&vafia\la,  152. 

airoAuTi/ci),  112. 

&.irp6crKovos,  336. 

Uprov  5(86yai  ^v  ^X?>  85. 

&pros  rrjs  tvxapuTTias,  39. 

apxal,  165. 

a<7ira<r/ubi'  /cai    tj^tjtik^v  irpoiTKivricrtv, 

550. 
a>a|W,  109. 
avOevrlav,  59. 
iipTjyirffa),  273. 
aQoplfccrBai,  71. 
dtpieVai,  83. 

$a\\l(eiv,  157. 
Qairrt^dnevot,  32. 
/9ere<£>tKfois,  29. 

7ec7jTd's)  4,  5,  6. 

■yev»]TOS  «al  ayivryros,  4. 

genitus  et  ingenitus,  5. 

7ervav,  5. 

yevvrjdivTa,  3- 

yevv7)6evTa  ov  irotriBevTa,  6. 

•ye'wrjcm,  6. 

76vv^Tbi/  6K  tt)s  ou<r(as  TOU  ITOTpbj  toV 

uibv  6/j.oovcriov,  5. 
76vyjjTby,  4,  5,  6,  7. 
Genuflectentes,  26,  32. 
7r<2<ns,  319. 
70vu/c\fvoi'Tej,  26. 

Deipara,  209. 
diaconissae,  41. 
8iaKoVio"o"c«,  41. 
SioKofKrffwv,  40. 

SlaKoVtOV,  40. 

5!aTU7rw<nj',  274. 

8l'  8A.T7S  auToC  OIKOVO/U1K7JS   &vao"Tpo<p7Js, 

346. 


Dominatio,  557. 
dominica  fwstia,  14. 

ecclesiastici,  129. 

e»  moTo!,  25. 

<«  crroixovari  tij  Svvd/xet,  342. 

eTSos,  29. 

clpyviKcil,  21,  276. 

^K  SuO  tpVCTeWV,  263. 

«?k  Suo,  204. 

e«  T7js  0eoT(JKou  Maplas,  208. 

*Kdeo&ai,  249. 

tK&ecnv  &\Arjv,  249. 

tK(p7Jvai,  212. 

electi,  32. 

cv  Suo  <pv<Teo~iv,  in  duabus  naturis, 

263. 
ivavBpiiiir-qcns,  174. 
ivcrdpicaxris,  174. 
4£opKiffT})s,  146. 
££a>8ovn£vot,  32. 
eViflu/iijcai,  81. 
iiriBvp.i]Cas,  81. 
iiropKKTT^s,  146. 
iiri.<TTo\a\  avcrraTiKal,  112. 
iiriTpaxh^-iov,  142. 
io-Tavpcifievov  tivai  ©ebv,  209. 
evayyeKta,  133. 
euA07e<V,  147. 
eulogise,  132. 
euA07i'a(,  32,  132. 
evX<*ts  twv  ayicav,  170. 
Euxapio-T/a,  the  sacred  meal,  14. 
«uxaP'°*T'a,/  Toteii',  14. 
i<popid(eiv,  147. 

ijy  7TOT6  OT6  OlIK  ijv,    3. 

of^a  0eoO,  209. 
Hecatostce,  369. 

T7JS  kvuXTtlilS,  312. 

'ivvtaiv,  211. 

iTe'pai/  irforiv,  167,  232,  265. 
eTepov  crvfi/ioAov,  265. 
Herniolia?,  126. 
Upoo-v\la,  38. 

<5t  7riCTTo!,   24. 
dymAcTv,  63. 

dp.6fiios,  4. 
6fj.oyvdp.cov,  4. 
(5/iOio/8ioy,  4. 
bfjLOioyvwfxttiV,  4. 
Hornoion,  175. 
Homoiousion,  3  n.,  5. 

d,uoAo7>7Tal,  146. 
d/xoovcriov,  3,  173. 
Homoousion,  3  u.,  4,  173,  175. 
Homousios,  3  n,  4,  7,  175. 

opos  e/CTe'SeiTai,  40. 

hostias,  for  os^'a,  141. 
Hyperberetseus,  596. 
virep<pv-))s  crvyK\T}Tos,  247. 

UTTTJpeTTJS,  83. 

fterffSpajTos,  174. 
3-eia  ypd/x/xara,  277. 
dei/cSs,  206. 
dsfew,  206  n. 


©ebs  7€ci'i)T(is,  7. 

©ebs  ireiroffiais,  209. 

i&ebj  aapKoepdpos,  174. 

deoToKos,  206  S<?. 

&6o<?d>s  174,  207,  212,  213. 

frepairelas,  129. 

0i5eii/,  11. 

0uo-£a,  14. 

tliymelici,  157. 

iSiKws,  360. 

i8iw/io,  (SitijUOTa,  209. 

«a&6(5  lauTbj<  els  KeVaxne,  202. 

Kadio-rao-Bat,  12,  130. 

/cat  ek  toD  Tiou,  168. 

Ka,K68o£os,  232. 

Ka\icrrpa,  KaAivdri&pa,  aMuSii^pa,  397. 

kcuwikos,  9. 

navoviKobs  for  kovovikoTs,  376. 

Koviiv,  excursus  ou  the  use  of  the 

word,  9. 
b  Kavav,  8. 

Kara,  rov  taov  iv  avr^i  rpbwov,  202. 
koto  (pvcriv,  202. 
tear   olneloicnv  oIkovoh.ikt)v,  211. 
Karaytiyta  rots  £4vois,  275. 
Korao'Tacrii',  12. 
KevuaavTa,  319. 
Kevwcriv,  204. 
Koii'bs  &pros,  14. 
comessalia,  157. 
comissalia,  157. 
commensalia,  157. 
confertum,  157. 
convertibilis  =  rpeirrov,  4. 
K07riaToi,  144. 
KOTTiuivres,  146. 
crimina  mortalia,  25. 

KTI^€1C,  5. 

KTicTbr,  4. 

AaTpeia,  527. 

AeiToupXE'TO),  110. 

A6iToup7e?f   ti  Tie  lepaTi/cwv  AeiToup- 

7iii>')  63. 
Aen-oup7iai,  101. 
AeTrpoxravras,  70. 
A070S,  Logos,  4. 

martyria,  101. 

Mater  Dei,  Dei  Genetrix,  Deipara, 
209. 

Matrix,  the  mother  church  or  ca- 
thedral, 458. 

jXicrdvXiov,  25. 

pLerdfiacns,  34. 

ueTa&etris,  34. 

jue'xpis  &v  T<S  koivSi  1\  Tip  iirurnSiTcp,  13. 

p^l  avvSvTOs  tov  irpeo~f}vTepov  Kara 
yvii>f).t\v  toC  iTriCKdwov,  94. 

pJrpn\p  tov  ©eoC  /iou,  209. 

militiam,  272. 

Mffis,  174. 

pL0p<p7)  345. 

munuscula,  370. 


INDEX   OF   WORDS   AND    PHRASES 


629 


naturaliter  fdius  =  Logos,  212. 

7}  irpoa<poph  rov  ad/jLaros  Ka\  tov  af/ua- 

ri  apxeia  e&»;  Kparelro,  288. 

v6as,  318. 

TOS,  14. 

rdyna,  41. 

vovs,  174,  819. 

Prothesis,  26. 

to  ev&poviOTiKa,  111 . 

NoCj  Sr]p.iovpy6s,  318. 

Trpocr<j)opai,  14. 

ra  t?)s  ayias  avvoZov  eWrpei^e,  259. 

Trpoacpopa,  65. 

Te\ei&T€poi,  perfecliores,  32. 

|ei>eoi<n  kcli  wruix^iois,  276. 

irpoxeip^Ce"'i  24. 

T&  iv&povHTTma,  111. 

fevoSoxeia,  275. 

psalmi  idiotici  135. 

T7)I>  efaipeTov  Ti/uV,  295. 

^evorpocpia,  275. 

psalmus  responsorius ,  138. 

rrjs  lepas  ffvyKhijTov^  247. 

xenon,  276. 

irraixeioe,  273. 

titulus,   a   small   country   church, 

irra>xeiVoj',  273. 

458. 

obscene,  377. 

irTOixoTpocbeiov,  273. 

Tifj.T)Tiitu>s  Trpo<TKvt>ea,  533. 

OlKOVOfX^lV,  184. 

TTvAapoi,  144,  145. 

t?>  f  k  5uo  Sexofini  '   tA  Suo,  ou  Sex^fJ-OA, 

otKovSftos,  oIkovojxIo.,  286. 

regiones  suburbicarice, 

248. 

dS6vv,  142. 

Regulafidei,  9. 

Tovbpv(Tfj.6u,  rov^opvafjLov,  421. 

ordinari,  and  ordinatio,  by  laying 

f>nr($iov,  286. 

T&  T6A.6IOC,    65. 

on  hands,  12. 

TOVrO  1T016?T6,    14. 

op&ws  teal  a\i]TVTbjs  ex6'">  237. 

sacerdotes,  143. 

rpa<p))  evxapttrrri&uaa,  14. 

op<£>  re  Kal  A.<fya>,  345. 

sacrarium,  26. 

rpeirrbv,  3  n. 

ouk  -f\v  rplv  y£i>vr)&j]vai,  6. 

sacrificare  (eucharistic),  14. 

Tpein6TT)S,  174. 

ovtos  o  Kavwv,  8. 

sacrificatum,  85. 

sacricificium  celebrare,  said   of  the 

unigenitus  impassibilis,  209. 

ira&^|UaTo  ©eoO,  209. 

Lord's  supper,  14. 

unigenitus  passibilis,  209. 

ira&os  0eoC,  209. 

sancta,  132. 

unius  substantia,  4. 

TlaKaTiavrjs,  124. 

sanctificatum,  85. 

vicarius  urbis,  16. 

^ams  benedictus,  32. 

sanctimoniales,  41. 

virfjinem  Deiparam  et  Deigenitri- 

Trapa-ywy^j',  318. 

sanguis   Domini,   used   eucharisti- 

cem,  209. 

irap'  evbs  etpjjtr&ai,  204. 

cally,  14. 

irap&4vos  ayvri,  41. 

oapKM&s,  Kara  erapKa,  206. 

fluentes,  25. 

passio    Domini,    used    eucharisti- 

o-ctpl,  174. 

formates,  112. 

cally,  14. 

serwio  entlironisticus,  177. 

fossarii,  146. 

iraiTTO(p6pia,  TTaarocpSpos,  31  n. 

(rrparelav,  272. 

fossores,  146. 

TT€\as,  neighbour,  anyone,  505. 

crTpareveffScu,  273. 

(pva-iKus,  naturaliter,  336. 

per  forinsecam  (or  forasticam)  po- 

(TTpaT((ire5oj/,  272. 

(pvaiv  fryovv  overlay,  314. 

testatem,  111. 

subintroductm,  11. 

<po)Ti(6/Aei>ot,  32. 

TrepioSevrai,  periodeutes,  158. 

ffvytcXalovTes,  25. 

(paTiafrri,  84. 

philtrvm,  605. 

o-uAAc^SaJ  ev&povHTTiKaL,  177. 

irv€v/j.a,  174. 

(7Vjj.<pa>vov  '6pov,  262. 

Xet/j.o(o/x4yoi,  25. 

■notiuv,  sacriflcially,  14,  14  n. 

cwayuiyi),  101. 

Xeipi'&u',  24. 

iroieie — euxapio'Tiai',  14. 

owaiTOui'Tes,  32. 

Xeipo&eo-i'o,  40. 

prsefectus  urbi,  16. 

<rui>a£is,  101. 

Xeipo&eTOUjueVous,  20. 

irpecrfidas,  intercession,  533. 

(TwavcurTpetpeaSiai,  71  n. 

X*'poTove7<r&ai,  130. 

irpe<r&UT?pcu,  41,  130. 

(TUJ/aVrfc!,  21 1. 

XtipoTovla,  imposition  of  hands,  12. 

irpea&vTiSes,  41,  42,  129. 

owaipeias,  203,  211. 

X^'poroviav,  12. 

primatus,  ecclesiastical  primacy,  17. 

<rvvei<raKTOs,  11,  52. 

XPI<ttot6kov,  313. 

Trpoax^vras,  147. 

(Tvvepwvpyiiv,  35. 
(ruvTmixevov,  319. 

XaipeiriffKoiroi,  21. 

TrpoeSpia  and  irpoaraaia,  287. 

X&>p!s  irpoatyopas,  24. 

Trp6eSpov  (TTpoifipos),  347,  385. 

ffvvzcTT&Tes,  26. 

X&pos,  X&Pai  Xap[°vi  228. 

irpoKa&'fi/j.eva.L,  130. 

o-vo-Tarucal,    commendatitice    Uteres, 

TrpoKOTT7j,  per  profectum  operum,  322. 

276. 

^aArai,  144. 

vpb  t?o.vtu>v  to.  TTpareia,  295. 

symbola,  157. 

^euSeiri-ypaipa,  598  n. 

irpbs  evoiffov  (pvcucfiv,  203. 

synaxis,  239. 

^**>,  12. 

Trpcxruvvricns,  526,  527. 

synousios,  4. 

^kx*/,  174. 

TrpOTrv\aiov,  25. 

(TtyuXfia,  391. 

<Jwx^  XoyiK^,  174,  314. 

irpoa<pepeiv,  excursus  on  the  word, 

W".  29. 

t//uX'Ka  ap.apTT]/j.aTa,  10. 

1,  13  sq.  ;  its  use,  63. 

crx^MaTi,  29,  40. 

i^uxiKb^  T(  a./j.dpTri/j.a,  10. 

irpoatpipuv  Tck  6wpo,  14. 

<r»/ua,  174. 

wpdpwf,  142. 

INDEX    OP    PLACES. 


Abbirita,  504. 

Abernethy  in  Scotland,  284. 

Abyssinia,  177. 

Achaia,  55. 

Adrianople,  184. 

Adrumetum,  458. 

^Elia  Capitolina,  17,  18. 

^Emilia,  56. 

Africa,  21,  32,  44,  45,  55,  283,  300, 
323,  395,  430,  438,  452,  489, 
474,  475,  484,  490,  494,  502. 

Agde,  270. 

Aix,  38,  166,  287,  294,  295. 

Alexandria,  xviii,  xxxiii,  9,  15,  16, 
17,  18,  19,  44,  45,  46,  48,  53, 
55,  56,  72,  112,  127,  173,  176, 
177,  178,  179,  180,  192,  201, 
208,  219,  220,  222,  224,  232, 
238,  251,  259,  262,  286,  291, 
294,  299,  302,  326,  327,  335, 
336,  344,  347,  356,  360,  361, 
362,  363,  413,  414,  434,  442, 
443,  493,  507,  508,  512,  513, 
514,  547,  576,  582,  592,  600, 
601,  613,  615. 

Amasea,  199. 

Anazarbus,  225. 

Ancyra,  xviii,  xxvi,  xxvii,  23, 
24,  29,  51,  57,  59,  60,  62,  74, 
78,90,  101,  105  seq.,  125,  158, 
163,  172,  176,  361,  363,  386, 
513,  533,  539. 

Antioch  in  Syria,  xiii,  xviii, 
xxvi,  xxvii,  xxx,  xxxi, 
xxxii,  4,  8,  17,  18,  19,  21,  22, 
32,  40,  44,  46,  47,  48,  57,  59, 
60,  69,  137,  144,  147,  152,  158, 
177,  178,  179,  181,  182,  185, 
189,  192,  200,  222,  225,  235, 
237,  238,  241,  242,  250,  251, 
253,  266,  274,  281,  286,  287, 
288,  289,  291,  293,  299,  308, 
326,  342,  343,  344,  347,  356, 
357,  360,  361,  363,  383,  413, 
414,  416,  443,  456,  576,  591, 
592. 

Apamea,  225,  237. 

Apulia,  16. 

Aquae,  504. 

Aquileia,  323. 

Aquitaine,  56,  583. 

Arabia,  18,  21,  107,266. 

Aradas,  225. 

Ariminum,  173. 

Aries,  8,  28,  36,  40,  303. 

Armenia,  89. 

Arzug,  465,  466. 

Asia,  55,  323,  435. 

Asia  Minor,  21,  62,  288. 

Assuri,  458. 

Augsburg,  xx,  45. 

Augusta,  225. 

Aulun,  143. 

Balnes,  162. 
Bangor  in  Down,  284. 
Battle,  271. 
Berea,  162,  363. 


Berlin,  62. 

Berrhoea  in  Syria,  32. 

Berytus,  277,  281,  290,  291. 

Bethlehem,  275. 

Bithynia,  260,  279,  508,  549. 

Biza  (Bizya),  242. 

Blachernae  of  Constantinople,  547. 

Bosphorus,  547. 

Bostra,  512,  513,  514. 

Bourges,  22. 

Braga,  120,  142,  156,  157,  159,  484. 

Brechin  in  Scotland,  284. 

Britain,  55,  56. 

Brussels,  xx. 

Brutii,  16. 

Bulgaria,  177. 

Byzacena,  440,  443,  503,  504. 

Caesarea  in  Cappadocia,  3,  17,  19, 
89,  90,  162,  248,  270,  273,  275, 
292,  356,  380,  604. 

C&esarea  in  Palestine,  162,  175. 

Calabria,  16. 

Calama,  504. 

Calcuth  in  England,  576. 

Calvita,  503. 

Campania,  16. 

Canterbury,  35. 

Cappadocia,  89. 

Capua,  413,  464. 

Carpi,  504. 

Carres,  162. 

Carthage,  xviii,  xxvi,  36,  37,  41, 
44,  127,  279,  300,  362,  371,  372, 

380,  402,  410,  444,  445,  446, 
448,  449,  455,  456,  458,  464, 
465,  466,  467,  468,  469,  470, 
472,  473,  474,  475,  476,  477, 
478,  479,  480,  481,  482,  483, 
484,  485,  486,  488,  489,  490, 
491,  492,  493,  494,  495,  496, 
497,  498.  499,  500,  501,  502, 
503,  504,  506,  508,  514,  515, 
516,  517,  570. 

Castabala  in  Cilicia,  225. 

Catanea,  537,  538,  539. 

Cenchrea,  41. 

Centuria,  484. 

Chalcedon,  xiv,  xv,  xviii,  xxxiv, 
3,  12,  17,  18,  23,  29,  41,59,60, 

110,   111,   112,   116,  129,  130, 

162,   167,  175,  179,   187,  199, 

200,   225,   233,  244  seq.,  259, 

260,   263,  265,  268,  271,  272, 

273,   275,  276,  278,  289,  290, 

291,   292,  299,   300,  302,  303, 

310,  311,  344,   360,   368,  373, 

381,  382,  386,  388,  404,  430, 
438,  468,  479,  512,  523,  547, 
559,  563,  567,  592. 

Chalons,  38,  283. 

Chrysopolis,  847. 

Cilicia,  55,  107. 

Ccele-Syria,  107,  242. 

Cologne,  xix.,  413. 

Colonia,  162. 

Constantiain  Cyprus,  384,  539,  581. 

Constantinople,      xi,      xiv,      xv, 


xvm,  xix,  xxvi,  xxx,  xxxiv, 
8,  16,  20,  30,  34,  35,  42, 
44,  45,  59,  89,  112,  162,  163, 
165,  167,  169,  170  seq.,  192, 
200,  207,  222,  229,  230,  244, 
247,  248,  253,  260,  263,  265, 
268,  274,  275,  280,  281,  282, 
283,  286,  287,  288,  289,  290, 

292,  294,  295,  299,  300,  302, 
303,  316,  317,  323,  326,  335, 
336,  343,  344,  347,  349,  356, 
357,  359,  360,  361,  363,  374, 
376,  382,  383,  384,  389,  405, 
410,  435,  443,  446,  507,  510, 
512,  513,  523,  540,  546,  547, 
550,  556,  562,  566,  584. 

Cordova  (Corduba),  xiii,  89,  415. 

Corinth,  357. 

Corsica,  16. 

Corycus  in  Cilicia,  225. 

Cos,  289. 

Cyprus,  47,  177,  234,  235,  383,  384, 

581. 
Cyrus,  162,  225,  363. 
Cyzicus,  44,  383. 

Dalmatia,  300. 
Diosopolis,  162. 
Dorchester,  281. 
Dorozy,  23. 

Doryloeum,  179,  187,  288. 
Dublin,  576. 

Dunkeld  in  Scotland,  284. 
Durazzo,  34. 

Eclanum,  230. 

Edessa,  86,  162,  270,  272,  281,  286, 

299. 
Egypt,  xxxiii,  16,  51,  52,  53,  55, 

293,  434. 

Elvira,  36,  51,  112,  145. 

Emissa,  225. 

England,  xxxiii,  25,  34,  39,  70, 
323,  372,  387,  396,  568. 

Epaon,  130. 

Ephesus,  xiv,  xv,  xviii,  3,  18, 
19,  23,  29,  48,  59,  167,  186. 
187,  191  seq.,  244,  259,  262, 
266,  268,  271,  273,  274,  286, 
299,  302,  303,  308,  309,  310, 
315,  322,  344,  360,  383,  547. 

Esbus,  225. 

Ethiopia,  47. 

Florence,    xv,   45,  166,  181,  232, 

290,  587. 
France,  21,  34,  323,  397,  548,  578. 
Frankfort,  385,  404,  539,  583,  584, 

585,  586. 
Fulda,  271. 

Gangra,  xviii,  xxvi,  xxvii,  51, 
57,  59,  60,  89,  91  seq.,  286, 
361,  447. 

Gaul,  21,  22,  55,  56,  143,  283,  583. 

Gaza,  414. 

Gentilly,  548. 

Germany,  583. 


INDEX   OF   PLACES. 


631 


Germinus,  614. 
Gloucester,  524. 
Gortyna  in  Crete,  356,  357. 

Hellespont,  383,  384. 

Heraclea  in  Thrace,  xxx,  225,  242. 

Heracleopolis,  225. 

Hertford,  271. 

Hierapolis,  225,  237. 

Himeria,  281. 

Hippo  Diarrhytus,  480. 

Hippo  Regius,  120,  286,  401,  443, 
449,  450,  451,  452,  453,  454, 
458,  459,  461,  462,  463,  464, 
466,  478,  483,  489,  490,  504. 

Horrea-Cascilia,  504. 

Iberia,  177. 
Iconium,  128,  162. 
Icosium,  504. 
Illyria,  261,  300. 
Illyricum,  288. 
Irenopolis,  225. 
Isauria,  107. 
Italy,  16,  55,  142,  323. 

Jerusalem,  9,  17,  18,  19,  32,  37,  47, 
92,  137,  162,  173, 189,  208,  222, 
223,  266,  274,  293,  299,  302, 
343,  356,  357,  363,  547,  576. 

Justinianopolis,  356,  383,  384. 

Kaiserwerth,  41. 
Kazan,  xxvii. 

Langres,  23. 

Laodicea  in  Phrygia,  xviii,  xxvi, 
xxvii,  9,  22,  42,  57,  59,  112, 
124  seq.,  162,  279,  361,  370, 
378,  399,  405. 

Laodicea  Magna,  225. 

Lebanon,  359. 

Leipsic,  xx,  xxi. 

Libya,  16,  55,  434,  615. 

Lilybseum,  56,  259. 

Lindsay,  281. 

Llanbadarn  Vawr,  284. 

London,  xxi,  413. 

Louvain,  xx. 

Lucania,  16. 

Lucca,  xx,  127. 

Lyco,  286. 

Lyons,  xv,  xx,  23,  587. 

Magnesia,  59. 

Maiuma,  270. 

Marcianopolis,  225. 

Mareotis,  434. 

Marmorica,  53. 

Mauretania,  461,  463,  466,  484, 486, 

517. 
Mauretania  Csesariensis,  440,  486, 

492,  504. 
Mauretania  Sitiphensis,  450,  483, 

486,  503,  504. 
Mayence,  xxxiv,  23,  38. 
Meaux,  244. 
Melitina,  162. 
Mesopotamia,  107,  241. 
Metz,  283. 
Migirpa,  458. 
Milan,  143,  181,  272,  323,  413,  414, 

470,  471. 


Milevis,  438,  483,  485. 
Mocta,  504. 
Monte  Casino,  271. 
Mopsuestia,  208,  231, 234,  299, 300, 
301,  303,  304,  306,  321,    322, 

360,  512. 

Moscow,  xxiii,  xxv,  xxvi,  xxvii, 

45. 
Munich,  418. 
Mutloblaca,  225. 
Muzuba,  504. 

Naples,  283,  504,  530. 

Nashotah,  ix. 

Nazianzum,  33,  34,  37,  177,  277. 

Neocsesarea,  xviii,  xxvi,  xxvii, 
22,  23,  24,  32,  40,  43,  44,  45, 
51,  52,  55,  57,  59,  60,  78,  79, 
81,  86,  90,  113,  125,  154,  225, 

361,  368,  373,  542,  579,  602. 
Neustria,  176. 

New  York,  xxi. 

Nice,  Nicsea  in  Bithynia,  xi,  xiv, 
xv,  xvii,  xxvi,  1,  2,  3,  8,  10, 
12,  13,  15,  17,  18,  20,  22,  23, 
24,  32,  33,  36,  60,  92,  93,  105, 
108,  112,  113,  125,  126,  140, 
151,  158,  178,  186,  187,  192, 
199,  231,  235,  238,  249,  260, 
261,  267,  274,  288,  294,  302, 
344,  359,  360,  368,  403,  428, 
436,  441,  442,  443,  506,  507, 
508,  517,  524,  525.  530,  540, 
548,   549,   552,  579,  582,  583, 

584,  585,  586,  587,  592,  603. 
Nicomedia,  32,  225,  267,  278. 
Nicopolis  in  Epirus,  267. 
Nisibis,  43. 

Novgorod,  xxvi. 

Numidia,  440,  441,  443,  447,  461, 

464,  465,  483,  484,  486,   503, 

504,  506,  517. 
Nyssa,  37,  38,  272,  286,  303,  512, 

611. 

Ombria,  16. 

Orange,  42,  130,  363. 

Orleans,   38,    130,    270,   283,   385, 

585,  592. 
Ostia,  576. 
Oxford,  xvii,  45. 

Palestine,  18,  107,  263,  266. 

Pamphylia,  240. 

Paphlagonia,  242. 

Paris,     xvii,      xx,      xxi,      xxxii, 

xxxiii,  45,  142,  526. 
Parnassus,  225. 
Pavia,  279. 
Pelusium,  142,  286. 
Pennaforte,  416. 
Pentapolis,  16,  615. 
Perga,  547. 
Perrha  in  Syria,  286. 

Pharan,  327,  343,  344,  347,   349, 

353,  360. 
Pharon,  336. 
Phasis,  242. 

Philadelphia,  ix,  225,  231,  286. 
Philippi,  220. 

Philippopolis,  184,  414,  435. 
Phoenicia,  18,  107,  232,  266. 


Phrygia,  150. 

Picenum  in  Italy,  16,  440,  503. 

Pisidia,  150. 

Poitiers,  37,  434. 

Pontion,  23. 

Pontus,  55,  78,  176,  287,  294,  295. 

Potentia,  441. 

Prum,  536. 

Ptolemais,  225. 

Puppiana,  458. 

Ravenna,  25,  143,  329,  357. 

Rheims,  38,  45,  283,  420,  526,  575. 

Riez,  21. 

Rome,  xiv,  xix,  xxxiv,  9,  13,  16, 
17, 18, 19,  20,  25,  44,  55,  56,  86, 
113,  142,  145,  162,  166,  167, 
178,  179,  180,  186,  187,  188, 
219,  223,  226,  232,  248,  259, 
261,  262,  272,  274,  275,  283, 
288,  291,  294,  295,  299,  300, 
304,  305,  317,  323,  342,  343, 
345,  352,  358,  360,  382,  418, 
419,  423,  424,  454,  456,  475, 
477,  493,  495,  507,  508,  532, 
533,  537,  538,  548,  571,  615. 

Rusgunium,  504. 

Russia,  134. 

Rusucarrum,  504. 

St.  Alban's,  568. 

St.  Asaph's,  xvii. 

St.  Brieuc,  231. 

St.  Petersburgh,  ix,  xxiii,  xxv, 
xxvi. 

Salamis,  163. 

Salona,  xxxiv. 

Samnium,  10. 

Samosata,  4,  40,  46,  158,  162,  516. 

Sardica,  xv,  xxvi,  xxvii,  xxxiv, 
34,  44,  55,  60,  158,  177,  181, 
182,  272,  274,  361,  410,  413, 
414,  434,  435,  436,  442. 

Sardinia,  16,  538. 

Sasima,  177. 

Scotland,  284. 

Scythia,  303. 

Scythopolis,  18. 

Sebaste,  89,  97,  162,  295. 

Sebastopol,  249,  261. 

Seleucia,  47,  173. 

Seville,  xxxiv,  286. 

Sicca,  506. 

Sicily,  16,  357,  504,  530. 

Silicia,  259. 

Simidica,  504. 

Sitifl,  504. 

Sorbonne  in  Paris,  417. 

Spain,  34,  56,  323. 

Sufetula,  504. 

Suffltula,  443. 

Sweden,  35,  55,  568. 

Syloeum,  547. 

Syria,  21,  32,  62,  516. 

Tagaste,  441,  486,  504. 
Tarsus,  162,  225,  609. 
The  Oaks,  512. 
Thebais  (Upper),  51. 
Theodosia,  225. 
Theopolis,  302. 

Thessalonica,  34,  180,  222,  357, 
389,  390,  430. 


632 


INDEX   OF   PLACES. 


Thrace,  176,  177,  287,  294,  295. 

Turin,  2,  45. 

Vegesela,  459. 

Toledo,  166,  167,  168,  271,   286, 

Tuscik,  16. 

Venice,  45,  379. 

363,  385. 

Tyana,  225,  277. 

Verdun,  38. 

Tours,  36,  271. 

Tyre,  272,  290,  291,  363. 

Veri,  504. 

Trajanopolis,  225. 

Verona,  413,  421. 

Trastevere,  142. 

United  States,  35. 

Vienna,  316. 

Trent,  10,  92,  157. 

Urspurg,  526. 

Vienne,  xxxv,  526. 

Tripoli,  440,  465,  466,  486,  487. 

Utica,  504. 

Villa  Regis,  464,  480. 

Trullan,   in  Trullo   (Constantino- 

ple), 60,  97,  110,  112, 127, 130, 

Vagai,  485. 

Wales,  56. 

149,   178,  229,  268,  279,   282, 

Valeria,  16. 

Warsaw,  xxv. 

287,  349,   356   seq.,   360,  366, 

Vannes,  385. 

Westminster,  271,  526. 

410,  414,  516,  556,   570,   591, 

Vatican  in  Rome,  45. 

612. 

Vazarita,  468. 

York,  38,  281. 

Tubinia,  464. 

INDEX   OP  SUBJECTS 


Abbess.     [See  Clergy.] 

Abbot.     [See  Clergy.] 

Abortion,  procurers  of,  73,  604, 
605  ;  fornicators  causing,  73, 
604 ;  those  giving  and  those 
receiving  drugs  for,  are  guilty 
of  murder,  404. 

Abraham,  his  story  reproduced  in 
painting,  539. 

Absolution  on  promise  of  amend- 
ment, 80 ;  does  ordination 
grant  it  ?  83. 

Accusations  against  bishops  and 
clergy  regulated,  183,  505 ; 
not  allowed,  if  from  mere  feel- 
ing or  faction,  183 ;  have  to 
be  stated  in  writing,  183.  [See 
Clergy.] 

Accused  or  accuser  may  choose  his 
place  of  safety  if  he  fears  vio- 
lence, 457. 

Accusers  of  bishops,  how  they  are 
to  be  dealt  with,  183. 

Acolyte.     [See  Clergy.] 

Actius,  archdeacon,  59. 

Actors,  on  their  conversion,  are  not 
to  be  denied,  463  ;  cannot  ac- 
cuse the  clergy,  504. 

Actress,  marriage  to  one  is  a  bar  to 
ordination,  595. 

Acts,  The,  as  an  historical  author- 
ity, 373. 

Acts  II.  42 136  n. 

Acts  III.  15 209. 

Acts  VI.  1-6 86. 

Acts  XV.  28,  29  .     .     .     .     92-93. 

Acts  of  first  two  ecumenical  coun- 
cils are  lost,  2 ;  speculations 
on  their  recovery,  2  n  ;  of  the 
third  ecumenical  council,  3, 
197  seq.  ;  of  the  fourth  ecu- 
menical council,  3,  344  seq.  ; 
of  the  fifth  ecumenical  coun- 
cil, 301  seq.  ;  of  the  sixth  ecu- 
menical council,  326  seq.  ;  of 
the  seventh  ecumenical  coun- 
cil, 523  seq.,  533  seq. 

Adam  was  not  created  subject  to 
death,  496. 

Adjure,  as  part  of  the  Exorcist's 
office.     [See  Clergy.] 

Administration  of  the  churches, 
184,  189. 

Adulterer,  seven  years'  penance, 
73,  604 ;  if  priest,  how  to  be 
disciplined,  79 ;  form  of  the 
ancient  discipline  to,  402, 
604  seq.,  608. 

Adulteress,  seven  years'  penance, 
73 ;  if  put  away  by  her  hus- 
band, 83  ;  if  she  departs  with- 
out reason,  402  ;  her  penance, 
402,  604  »eq.,  608 ;  degrees  of 
fault,  606,  607. 

Adultery  charged  against  one  who 
marries  a  woman  betrothed, 
406. 

Advocate  of  the  most  holy  Church 


of  Constantinople,  284.  [See 
Clergy.] 

Aedituus,  a  temple  officer,  145  ; 
magister  and  minister,  145. 

iElia,  the  position  and  honor  due 
to  its  bishop,  17;  is  next  in 
honor  to  the  Metropolitan  see, 
17 ;  is  identified  with  Cassarea, 
17 ;  is  identified  with  Jerusa- 
lem, 17,  18. 

Africa,  one  not  communicating  in, 
but  going  across  seas,  is  cast 
out,  494. 

African  Bishops,  44,  45  ;  occasion 
scandal,  370;  have  been  ap- 
pealing to  court,  421,  422, 
422  ;  councils  and  canons,  438  ; 
opposed  to  an  appeal  being 
carried  ' '  across  the  water, " 
456;  distressed  condition  of 
the  church,  471,  477,  483  seq., 
486 ;  church  promises  to  follow 
the  Roman,  474;  bishops  are 
to  be  represented  by  the  bishop 
of  Carthage,  483 ;  previous 
decrees  are  confirmed,  483 ; 
primacy  not  locally  fixed,  484. 

Agatho  I.,  Pope,  325  seq.,  343, 
349;  sent  a  legate  to  the 
sixth  ecumenical  council,  326, 
328  seq. ;  was  cited  as  one  of 
the  patriarchs  by  the  Emper- 
or, 326  ;  had  been  consulted 
by  the  Emperor,  326  ;  sent  let- 
ter to  the  council,  328  seq.  ;  his 
letters  were  examined  and  ap- 
proved, 328  ;  confirms  the  five 
general  councils,  329,  330; 
the  statement  of  his  faith, 
330  seq.  ;  confessed  the  two 
wills,  331,  332  ;  letter  of 
Agatho  and  the  Roman  Synod 
to  the  Emperor,  340,  345 ;  his 
profession  of  faith,  340;  his 
suggestions  confirmed  by  other 
bishops,  342,  347  seq. ;  letter 
from  the  Synod  at  Constanti- 
nople to  him,  349  seq. 

Album,  church  register,  32. 

Alexandria,  its  jurisdiction  con- 
firmed, 15  ;  extent  of  its  juris- 
diction, 15,  180 ;  was  patri- 
archal in  its  jurisdiction,  15, 
16,  180,  287  seq. ;  had  jurisdic- 
tion over  the  whole  diocese  of 
Egypt,  15,  180  ;  was  placed 
after  Constantinople,  178,  180, 
287  seq. ,  382 ;  was  under  a 
Metropolitan  or  Archbishop, 
291  ;  its  see  ranked  as  the 
third,  382. 

Alexis  Comnenus,  Emperor,  27; 
extent  of  his  penance,  27. 

Alms-house.     [See  Poor-house.] 

Altar  set  up  in  private  assembly, 
an  act  of  schism,  110;  priest- 
hood alone  go  to  it,  and 
communicate,  136 ;   may  not 


be  approached  by  women, 
153 ;  the  only  place  for  mak 
ing  the  oblation,  158  ;  the  set- 
ting up  is  a  mark  of  schism, 
447,  448. 

Alypius,  Bp.,  atSardican  Council, 
424,  441 ;  Bp.  of  the  Tagas- 
tine  Church,  441,  442,  480, 
486,  503,  504  ;  delegate  of  the 
Council,  503,  504. 

Ambo,  the  reading  desk  in  church, 
26,  132,  137,  381,  564;  used 
by  the  canonical  singers,  132; 
used  only  by  one  who  is  ton- 
sured, 381 ;  used  irregularly 
by  tonsured  youths  unor- 
dained,  563. 

Ambrogio,  the  church  in  Milan,  25. 

Ambrose, on  the  Easter  question,  56. 

Amphilochius,  bishop  of  Seleucus, 
from  his  iambics,  613. 

Amulets  are  not  to  be  made  by 
priesthood  or  clergy,  151  ; 
those  who  wear  them  are  to 
be  cast  out  of  the  church,  151 ; 
givers  of,  are  to  be  avoided, 
393. 

Anastasius,  Bishop  of  Rome,  warns 
the  African  Church  against 
the  Donatists,  475. 

Anathema  from  Christ,  148,  150 ; 
for  changing  creeds,  167,  168. 

Anchorites  reserved  the  Holy  Com- 
munion, 392.     [See  Clergy.] 

Ancient  customs  in  Egypt,  etc.,  to 
prevail,  15 ;  meaning  of  the 
phrase  in  the  Canon,  17. 

Ancyra,  council  of  in  314  A.D., 
62  seq.  :  its  canons,  63  seq. 

Angels,  their  invocation  is  forbid- 
den, 150,  150  ;  their  invoca- 
tion is  covert  idolatry,  150; 
their  invocation  is  a  forsaking 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  the  Son 
of  God,  150 ;  those  who  in- 
voke will  receive  anathema, 
150 ;  their  assemblies  "  for- 
sake the  Church  of  God," 
150;  Christians  are  forbidden 
to  name  (ovoitAfav)  them,  150  ; 
the  cultus  of,  151  ;  Origenistic 
ideas  upon  them  and  their  re- 
lation to  Christ,  318,  319. 

Anglican  communion,  its  ages  for 
ordination,  372.  [See  Clergy.] 

Annunciation,  the  feast  of  the,  155. 

Anointing  of  converted  heretics  on 
their  reception,  127. 

Anthimus,  Archbishop  of  Constan- 
tinople,was  deposed,  34. 

Antimensia,  or  superaltar  in  an  ora- 
tory, 560  ;  its  special  consecra- 
tion, 561. 

Antioch,  the  see  of,  18,  382 ;  its 
privileges  were  secured  by  Ni- 
cene  Canon,  176;  jurisdiction 
of  its  bishop  defined  at  Chalce- 
don,    266 ;   its  see  ranked  as 


634 


INDEX   OP   SUBJECTS 


fourth,  382;  its  jurisdiction 
and  privileges  confirmed  at 
Nice,  15, 15,  47 ;  its  see  in  rela- 
tion to  that  of  Jerusalem,  19  ; 
to  that  of  Cyprus,  47 ;  its  rela- 
tion to  Constantinople,  178, 
180,  382  ;  received  Flavian  as 
its  bishop,  189 ;  was  placed 
after  Constantinople,  178,  180, 
287  seq. ;  the  Meletian  party 
there,  181. 

Antiocb,  in  Encaeniis,  the  Synod  of, 
102  seq.;  historical  introduc- 
tion, 105-6 ;  its  date  known, 
105  ;  held  in  the  summer  of 
341,  a.d.  105;  had  no  West- 
ern bishops,  105 ;  historical 
difficulty  surrounds  it,  105-6  ; 
was  opposed  to  Athanasius, 
105  ;  was  ' '  Synodus  Sancto- 
rum," 105  ;  its  canons  obtained 
great  authority,  105  ;  perhaps 
the  true  solution  of  the  dif- 
ficulty, 106  ;  the  synodal  letter, 
107 ;  titles  given  to  the  synod, 
108  n. 

Antiphon,  138,  159. 

Apiarius,  presbyter  at  Sicca,  44, 
506  ;  was  excommunicated  for 
scandal,  506;  was  restored  to 
the  rank  of  the  presbyterate, 
506 ;  formal  report  upon  the 
case,  509  seq. ;  was  cast  out  of 
the  church,  510. 

Apollinare,  churches  in  Ravenna, 
25. 

Apollinaris.     [See  Heretics.] 

Apostates,  66 ;  compelling  others 
to  apostatize,  66 ;  their  pen- 
ances, 66-7  ;  on  their  conver- 
sion are  not  to  be  denied,  463  ; 
here  probably  referring  to  the 
Lapsi,  463. 

Apostolic  Canons  were  confirmed 
by  Nicene  Canon,  8, 10  ;  are  re- 
ferred to,  10,  11,  12,  93,  555; 
decision  at  Jerusalem,  92,  93  ; 
their  authority,  xi,  113,  366, 
591  seq. ;  confirmed  by  the 
Quinisext  Council,  361,  366, 
591 ;  not  directly  ascribed  to 
the  authorship  of  the  Apostles, 
361,  362,  366,  555,  591  seq.; 
witness  to  contemporary  cus- 
toms, 366, 555 ;  may  be  of  Apos- 
tolic origin,  591,  592 ;  their 
probable  date,  591 ;  their  place 
in  early  collections,  591,  592  ; 
recent  discussions  upon,  592, 
593  ;  index  of  printed  editions 
in  Slavonic  and  Russian, 
xxv  seq. 

Apostolic  Synod  and  decisions,  92, 
93. 

Apostolical  Constitutions,  was  re- 
jected at  Quinisext  Council, 
361 ;  is  believed  to  have  been 
corrupted,  361;  if  written  by 
Clement,  361 ;  its  origin,  137, 
361 ;  Harnack's  theory  upon, 
593. 

Apparel,  strange,  assumed  by  Eus- 
tathians,  91 ;  strange,  also  by 


slaves,  91 ;  plainness  and  fru- 
gality commended,  101 ;  ex- 
cess to  be  eschewed,  101. 

Appeals  to  the  Emperor,  bow  regu- 
lated, 114,  420,  495,  502, 
507  ;  on  a  doubtful  synodical 
decision  were  to  extra  provin- 
cial bishops,  115,  510;  none 
against  a  unanimous  judg- 
ment, 115 ;  made  discreditable 
among  the  clergy,  183;  no  re- 
course to  the  secular  powers, 
276 ;  question  of  appeal  for 
the  highest  Pontiff,  374  ;  might 
be  made  to  Julius,  bishop  of 
Rome,  417,  417  seq.  ;  discus- 
sion upon  the  question  of  ap- 
peals to  Rome,  417  seq.,  442, 
456,  495,  507,  510;  court  of 
appeal  for  the  clergy,  442, 448, 
449,  456,  502,  507,  510;  from 
the  African  church  are  not  to 
be  carried  "  across  the  water," 
456,  507,  510  ;  in  the  African 
church  the  Court  of  Appeal 
consists  of  12  neighboring  bish- 
ops, 456,  456,  502,  507';  to  an 
universal  council,  456,  510; 
clergy  must  appeal  within  the 
year,  481;  those  appealing  to 
the  court  must  give  notice  to 
the  bishops  of  Rome  or  Car- 
thage, 495  ;  they  shall  receive 
and  carry  formal  letters  from 
the  primate,  495  ;  "  all  matters 
should  be  settled  in  the  places 
where  they  arise,"  510 ;  to  the 
synod  against  bishops,  111, 
448,  459,  510;  appeals  from 
presbyters,  deacons,  laity,  and 
all  clerics,  111,  448,  449;  by 
the  church  to  the  secular  pow- 
ers for  protection,  472,  476, 
488,  489 ;  no  appeal  from 
judges  chosen  by  the  plaintiff, 
491,  501 ;  one  may  ask  from 
the  Emperor  an  episcopal  trial, 
494 ;  as  between  the  Donatists 
and  Catholics  at  the  former's 
conforming,  500,  501. 

Arabic  canons  spurious,  1,  43  seq. ; 
given,  46  seq. 

Archbishop.     [See  Clergy.] 

Archdeacon.     [See  Clergy.] 

Aristenus,  Alexis,  canonist, 
xxxiii ;  his  life  and  work, 
xxxiii. 

Armenian  irregularities,  381,  391, 
407. 

Asceticism,  underlying  Eustathian- 
ism,  92  seq.  ;  merging  into  un- 
enlightened hyperasceticism, 
92  seq. ,  101 ;  in  special  features 
of  the  Roman  church,  98  ;  not 
in  itself  to  be  spoken  against, 
101;  objected  to  on  the.  score 
of  pretence,  pride,  and  want  of 
charity,  101. 

Ascetics,  none  of  the  class  ought  to 
enter  a  tavern,  144 ;  must  not 
bathe  with  women,  149. 

Asian  diocese,  its  bishops  adminis- 
ter Asian  affairs  only,   176; 


its  bishops  are  to  be  ordained 
by  the  Patriarch  of  Constanti- 
nople, 177,  287. 

Assemblies  for  the  invocation  of 
angels  is  forbidden,  150  ;  those 
leaving  the  church  for  such  are 
open  to  anathema,  150.  [See 
Angels.] 

Astrologer,  definition  of,  151  ; 
priesthood  or  clergy  shall  not 
be,  151. 

Astronomy  is  not  forbidden  to  the 
clergy,  151. 

Athanasius  was  acquitted  by  Jeru- 
salem Synod,  18  ;  bishops  op- 
posed him  at  Antioch,  105  ;  his 
return  to  Alexandria,  413, 414  ; 
discovery  of  his  Paschal  Let- 
ters, 413, 414,  433,  434  ;  he  was 
received  by  the  Sardican  coun- 
cil, 435  ;  his  reception  caused 
a  rupture  in  the  council,  435  ; 
his  epistle  to  the  Monk  Am- 
mus  (or  Amun),  602  ;  his  epistle 
upon  the  Canon  of  Scripture, 
603 ;  his  epistle  to  Rufianus, 
603  seq. 

Atrium  in  a  church,  25. 

Atticus,  Bp.  of  Constantinople,  44. 

Audientes.     [See  Hearers.  ] 

Aunt  may  live  with  clergyman,  46. 

Aurelius,  bishop  of  Carthage,  441, 
458,  465,  485,  486,  487, 
489,  506;  his  allocution  to 
the  African  Council,  458 ; 
held  a  council  to  receive  the 
report  of  delegates  to  the 
West,  486;  was  authorized  to 
sign  decrees,  letters,  etc.,  495, 
503,  506. 

Autocephalous  churches,  177. 

Auxentius,  a  notary  of  Licinius, 
anecdote  of,  28. 

Azymes  of  the  Jews,  are  not  to 
be  received,  151. 

Bacchus's  name  shall  not  be  in- 
voked, 393. 

Ballerini,  The,  37. 

Balsamon,  Theodore,  scholiast, 
xxxiii  ;  his  Scholia,  xxxiii ; 
the  Paratitles,  xxxiii. 

Baptism  is  preceded  by  the  steps 
in  the  catechumenate,  185 ; 
shall  not  take  place  in  private 
oratory  without  the  bishop's 
leave,  379;  is  to  be  given  to 
unknown  infants,  402 ;  the 
virtue  of  such  a  mystery,  402 ; 
for  putting  on  Christ  and  his 
life,  405  ;  should  not  be  given 
to  the  bodies  of  the  dead, 
450,  451 ;  is  to  be  given  to  the 
sick  if  they  have  desired  it, 
463;  is  not  to  be  repeated, 
464 ;  by  heretics,  questions 
upon,  470,  471,  516  ;  the 
spiritual  laver,  10 ;  not  to  be 
hurried  on,  10,  10;  its  spirit- 
ual effect,  24,  154  ;  followed 
by  confirmation  and  commun- 
ion to  infants,  29,  30 ;  in 
name  of  the  Trinity,  20,  40  ; 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


635 


the  Paulianist's  invalid,  40 ; 
by  immersion,  41,  82;  dea- 
conesses were  useful  in  the 
rite,  41 ;  sponsors  in,  47 ; 
names  given,  47 ;  covers  pre- 
vious sin,  68,  126  ;  clinical,  is 
a  bar  to  ordination,  84,  154  ; 
given  in  sickness,  84,  154 ; 
was  often  postponed,  85 ; 
heretical,  as  held  invalid, 
128,  185;  forms  of,  by  the 
heretics,  604 ;  candidates  for, 
cannot  come  after  the  second 
week  in  Lent,  153;  time  and 
modes  of  preparation  for,  153  ; 
is  not  to  be  repeated  on  clinics, 
154 ;  must  be  followed  by 
chrism,  154 ;  shall  not  lake 
place  in  an  oratory  within  a 
house,  392;  should  be  given 
to  infants,  496 ;  question  of, 
heretical,  517,  518  ;  shall  not 
be  repeated,  597 ;  shall  be 
into  the  Father,  the  Son,  and 
the  Holy  Ghost,  597,  610; 
shall  not  be  into  three  unorigi- 
nated  beings,  or  three  sons  or 
three  comforters,  597 ;  shall 
be  with  three  immersions  and 
not  with  only  one,  597,  610; 
the  renunciations  at,  610;  at 
Easter,  611. 

Barbarian  churches,  379,  379. 

Barbarians,  the  church  suffering 
from,  282,  374,  382;  priests 
among  them,  to  be  cared  for, 
379 ;  church  standing  is  pre- 
served under  disorders  from, 
382 ;  indulgence  to  irregulari- 
ties caused  by,  382 ;  their  op- 
pression of  the  Christians,  602; 
canons  made  necessary  by 
them,  602  ;  date  of  the  canons, 
c.  240,  a.d.  602  n. 

Basil,  bishop  of  Ancyra,  234,  533 ; 
his  withdrawal  from  the  Icono- 
clasts and  his  submission,  533  ; 
his  confession  on  his  return  to 
orthodoxy,  533;  his  confession 
of  the  faith,  533. 

Basil,  Bp.  of  Caesarea  (the  Great), 
25,  71,  127,  131,  132,  213,  248, 
273,  275,  277,  303,  361,  380, 
545,  567,  583  ;  allowed  Valens 
to  witness  the  holy  mysteries, 
127 ;  his  hospital  near  Csesarea, 
273,  275 ;  enjoins  the  use  of 
water  and  wine  in  the  eucha- 
rist,  380;  his  Basiliad,  273, 
275  ;  his  canons  for  regulating 
the  order  of  Virgins,  384, 
384  ;  his  first  canonical  epistle, 
604 ;  his  second  canonical  epis- 
tle, 605  ;  his  third  epistle,  607  ; 
his  epistle  to  Amphilochius, 
307,  609  ;  to  Diodorus,  Bp.  of 
Tarsus,  609 ;  to  Gregory,  a 
presbyter,  610 ;  to  the  chor- 
episcopi,  610;  to  the  suffra- 
gans, 610;  from  chapter  xvii. 
of  his  book  to  Amphilochius, 
610  ;  from  letter  to  the  Nico- 
politans,  611. 


Basiliad,  built  by  S.  Basil  near 
Cassarea,  273,  275. 

Basilides,  a  Spanish  bishop,  63. 

Bassianus,  59. 

Belt,  the  soldier's  badge,  28. 

Bema,  in  a  church,  26. 

Benedict  XIV.,  in  favor  of  the 
new  views  of  usury,  39. 

Benenatus,  African  bishop,  496 ; 
received  legation  against  the 
Donatists,  496. 

Berus,  common  upper  garment, 
97. 

Bestial  sins — how  dealt  with,  70 ; 
penance  measured  by  age,  70 ; 
penance  measured  by  condi- 
tion, 70. 

Betrothal,  its  close  relation  to 
marriage,  406,  407. 

Beveridge,  bishop  of  S.  Asaph, 
value  of  his  collection  in  the 
Synodkon,  xv  ;  contents  of  the 
Synodicon,  xvii.  seq. 

Bigamy,  a  bar  to  ordination,  23; 
its  discipline,  47,  80 ;  matter 
of  penance,  50,  80 ;  is  dis- 
tinguished from  digamy,  125. 

Birds  or  other  living  things  shall 
not  be  offered  on  the  altar, 
594. 

Birthday  feasts  are  not  to  be  cele- 
brated in  Lent,  156. 

Bishop.     [See  Clergy.] 

Bishops,  the  translation  of,  excur- 
sus on.     [See  Clergy.] 

Blasphemy  a  bar  to  ordination, 
23. 

Blastares,  Matthew,  his  collection 
of  canons,  xxxiii. 

Blood,  eating  of,  forbidden,  92, 
93,  395,  395,  598;  how  al- 
lowed to  a  dainty  stomach, 
395 ;  the  slackening  of  the 
restriction,  395. 

Bond  servants  are  not  to  be  or- 
dained, 46.     [See  Slaves.] 

Boniface,  Pope,  44,  45. 

Books,  uncanonical,  may  not  be 
read  in  church,  158 ;  canoni- 
cal books  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testament  may  alone  be  read, 
158  ;  canonical  list,  159  ;  but 
the  canon  and  list  are  proba- 
bly not  genuine,  159  ;  of  the 
Old  and  New  Testament  are 
not  to  be  cut  up  or  corrupted, 
396;  of  holy  and  approved 
preachers  and  teachers  are  not 
to  be  cut  up,  etc.,  396;  were 
used  by  heretics  to  support 
their  errors,  396. 

Bota  is  to  be  abolished  from  the 
life  of  the  faithful,  393,  394. 

Bribery  resorted  to  with  the  Chris- 
tian soldiers,  28. 

Britain,  55,  56. 

British  church,  its  Easter  tradi- 
tion, 56. 

Brumalia  is  to  be  abolished  from 
the  life  of  the  faithful,  393, 
394. 

Bulgaria,  privileges  belonging  to 
its  bishop,  177. 


Caecilian,  Bp.,  44. 

Caesarea,  had  its  metropolitan  un- 
der Antioch  patriarchate,  16  ; 
its  bishop  above  him  of  Jeru- 
salem, 46. 

Calatores,  145,  146. 

Calendars  on  Easter,  56,  108. 

Calends,  so  called,  shall  be  abol- 
ished from  the  life  of  the  faith- 
ful, 393. 

Calvin  has  given  the  modern  moral 
code  of  usury,  37. 

Calvinistic  teaching  on  the  Eu- 
charist, 39. 

Cancelli,  or  chancel,  in  a  church, 
26. 

Canon,  the  ecclesiastical,  as  a  bind- 
ing law,  125, 193  ;  its  ecclesi- 
astical value,  127-8;  some 
were  of  a  local  or  temporary 
character,  373. 

Canon,  excursus  on  the  word,  1, 
9,  557;  "the  Canon  of  faith," 
9  ;  "  the  canon  of  truth,"  9  ; 
contrary  to  ecclesiastical,  10, 
101, 234 ;  early  collections  of, 
59  ;  of  the  church,  91,  101 ; 
named  with  the  Scriptures, 
101 ;  the  holy  canon,  external 
honor  due  to,  108;  "ancient 
canon  which  prevailed  from 
our  fathers,"  112,  113;  "ac- 
cording to  the  canons,"  176  ; 
"forbidden  by  the  ancient 
canons,"  283  ;  canon-law,  and 
its  collections,  xxxii.  seq. 

Canonical  Books  of  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments,  158,  453-4, 
599,  612 ;  may  alone  be  read 
in  church,  158,  454,  612; 
their  names,  159,  453-4,  599, 
612 ;  list  of  Laodicea  prob- 
ably not  genuine,  159. 

Canonical  Hours.  [See  Choir 
Offices.] 

Canonical  Letters.  [See  Letters 
Commendatory.  ] 

Canonization  by  the  Pope,  162, 
162  n. 

Canons  of  Nice,  the  twenty,  with 
the  ancient  epitome  and  notes, 
1, 8  seq. ;  excursus  on  the  num- 
ber of  the  Nicene,  1 ,  43  seq.  ; 
spurious  Arabic,  1,  46  seq.; 
' '  contrary  to  the  canons  of 
the  Holy  Apostles,"  234;  the 
canons  made  in  synods  preced- 
ing Chalcedon  are  to  remain 
in  force,  267,  388 ;  forbidden 
by  the  ancient  canon,  283 ; 
often  the  revival  of  a  former 
canon,  388,  557 ;  must  be 
obeyed  by  bishops  and  clerg.y, 
556,  556  ;  collections  of,  xv 
seq.,  xxxii  seq. ;  Nomocanon, 
xxxii ;  Syntagnia,  xxxii ; 
'Swo6iKbv,  sive  pandecta?, 
xxxii. 

Cantharus  in  a  church,  25. 

Cantor.     [See  Singer.] 

Captives  by  the  barbarians  shall 
be  dealt  with  leniently,  602 ; 
those  who  have  eaten  with  the 


636 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


barbarians  are  not  as  those 
eating  with  idols,  682. 

Carmelites  in  making  their  profes- 
sion, 387. 

Caroline  books,  examination  of,  578 
seq.  ;  their  authorship,  578  ; 
their  authority,  578  seq. ;  their 
contents,  579  seq.  ;  the  chief 
cause  of  trouble  a  logomachy, 
582  ;  chief  strictures  of  Hefele 
upon  them,  582  seq. 

Carosus,  59. 

Carthage,  the  canons  of,  410,  438 
seq.  ;  canons  of  the  council 
held  under  Cyprian,  410,  516 
seq.  ;  its  importance  in  Africa, 
438  seq.,  465,  469,  483;  its 
bishop  had  the  privilege  of  or- 
daining bishops  at  his  discre- 
tion, 468-9. 

Carthage,  the  council  of,  held 
under  Cyprian  257,  a.d.  515 
seq.  ;  introductory  note,  516  ; 
the  most  ancient  of  synods, 
516  ;  synod  of  84  bishops,  516, 
517 ;  Cyprian's  letter  upon 
heretical  baptism,  518  seq. 

Carthage,  the  217  blessed  fathers 
who  assembled  at,  in  419,  a.d. 
commonly  called  the  code  of 
canons  of  the  African  church, 
441  seq.  ;  upon  the  councils  at 
Carthage,  438  seq.  ;  standing 
and  authority  of  the  African 
code,  438,  506  ;  had  vast  num- 
ber of  synods  or  councils,  438  ; 
list  of  the  councils,  439,  458 
seq. ;  value  of  collection  of  can- 
ons as  a  collection,  439,  506 ; 
question  as  to  the  genuineness 
of  their  Nicene  decrees,  442 
seq.;  orders  issued  for  exam- 
ination into  that  question,  443  ; 
the  canons,  444 ;  note  upon  the 
ratification,  506  ;  case  of  Apia- 
rius  taken  up  and  reported 
upon,  506,  509  seq.;  proposed 
that  a  plenary  council  meet  in 
Carthage,  and  the  other  prov- 
inces, 490;  decreed  that  a 
universal  council  be  held  in 
the  African  church  when 
necessary,  490,  491. 

Castration,  its  relation  to  church 
discipline,  8,  8,  9,  595 ;  by 
surgical  operation,  8,  595  ; 
by  barbarians,  8,  8,  595  ;  by 
voluntary  action,  8,  8,  595  ; 
on  a  slave,  8,  8  ;  Nicene  canon 
upon,  confirmed  by  later  syn- 
ods, 9  ;  was  common  among 
the  Messalians,  241 ;  counted 
in  the  church  the  same  as  self- 
murder,  595. 

Castrensians,  officers  of  the  palace, 
273. 

Catechumens,  need  time  and  prep- 
aration for  baptism,  10,  10, 
11,  185  ;  where  they  stood  in 
church,  26  ;  how  disciplined 
if  they  have  lapsed,  31 ;  their 
place  in  the  service,  31,  136, 
138  ;  different  kinds  or  classes, 


31,  32,  81,  82,  185;  how  they 
were  instructed,  32,  185  ;  had 
their  names  registered,  32  ;  pe- 
riods for  their  registration,  32  ; 
the  lapsed,  how  they  were  to 
be  disciplined,  31,  68  ;  though 
lapsed,  could  be  ordained,  68  ; 
how  disciplined  when  they 
fell,  81 ;  prayer  said  for,  and 
dismissed,  136,  138  ;  invited 
by  the  deacon  to  leave,  138  ; 
how  classed,  147,  153  ;  by  dis- 
pensation made  readers  and 
singers,  363 ;  recited  the  creed 
on  Friday  to  the  bishop  or 
presbyter,  399 ;  confessed  the 
faith  prior  to  baptism,  82 ; 
professed  their  desire  for  bap- 
tism, 82. 

Catholic  phraseology,  39 ;  goes 
with  a  Catholic  church,  392. 

Cattle  or  other  beasts  shall  not  be 
driven  into  a  church,  403  ;  ne- 
cessity may  allow  it  to  be  done, 
403. 

Celestine  I.  charges  Nestorius  with 
heresy,  xiii,  xiv  n.,  192  ;  re- 
ceives from  Cyril  a  full  ac- 
count of  Nestorius's  teaching, 
192 ;  put  Nestorius  under  the 
threat  of  excommunication, 
192  ;  sent  his  deputies  to  the 
Council     of     Ephesus,     193, 

219  seq. ;  wrote  a  letter  to  the 
closing  council,  195  ;  his  let- 
ter to  the  synod  of  Ephesus, 

220  seq.  ;  his  legates  or  depu- 
ties acted  in  his  name  at  Nesto- 
rius's deposition,  223  ;  is  not 
to  be  mistaken  for  Celestius, 
225,  226,  229;  letter  of  the 
synod  of  Ephesus  to  Celes- 
tine, 237  seq. 

Celibacy,  a  vow  by  deaconesses,  41. 
[See  Clergy.] 

Cemeteries,  heretical  meetings  in, 
129  ;  the  faithful  must  not 
attend  such  meetings,  129 ; 
discipline  for  attending  such 
meetings,  129. 

Chalcedon,  the  fourth  ecumenical 
council,  451,  a.d.  243  seq.  ; 
under  Marcian  and  Pulcheria, 
emperors  in  the  east,  243, 
262,  359 ;  under  Valentinian 
III.,  emperor  in  the  west, 
243,  267 ;  the  history  is  high- 
ly controversial  and  difficult, 
3,  12,18,  19,  23,  29,  59,  86, 
111,  112,  116,  130,  167,  169, 
171,  177,  178,  186,  199,  200, 
201,  233,  244,  277,  278,  302, 
382 ;  Bossuet's  account  of, 
244  seq.  ;  its  fathers  expound- 
ed the  canon  of  Ephesus,  233  ; 
Leo's  letter  or  tome  was  gen- 
erally accepted,  244  ;  the  tome 
was  tested  for  its  agreement 
with  the  Nicene  faith,  xiv, 
244  ;  its  code  of  canons,  111  ; 
extracts  from  the  acts,  247  seq. ; 
Nicene  creed  was  read  and 
approved,  249  ;  its  statement 


upon  commendatory  letters, 
112 ;  creed  of  Ephesus  was 
read  and  approved,  249;  Cy- 
ril's letter  to  Nestorius  was 
read,  250;  Cyril's  letter  to 
John,  Bp.  of  Antioch,  was 
read,  250;  text  of  Cyril's  let- 
ter to  John,  251  seq.  ;  the 
reading  of  the  Tome  of  St. 
Leo,  254  seq. ;  definition  of 
faith,  262  ;  its  sentence  against 
Eutyches,  111;  the  xxx.  canons 
of  the  holy  and  fourth  Syn- 
ods, of  Chalcedon,  267  seq.  ; 
confirmation  given  to  the  can- 
ons of  all  earlier  synods,  267, 
302 ;  canon  xxviii.  long  held 
in  suspense  by  the  Latins, 
287 ;  controversies  regarding 
the  synod  itself,  302  ;  its  deal- 
ings with  the  Three  Chapters, 
309  seq. ;  condemned  Euty- 
ches, Nestorius,  and  Diosco- 
rus,  260,  312,  344,  359;  its 
faith  confirmed  by  the  Quini- 
sext  Council,  359;  its  canons 
also  confirmed  there,  361 ;  its 
relation  to  the  Roman  see,  xiv, 
xxxiv  ;  it  granted  special 
honour  and  privilege  to  Con- 
stantinople, xiv. 

Chalcedon,  the  see  was  made  a 
titular  metropolis,  278. 

Charisius,  his  libellam  against  Nes- 
torius, 231,  232. 

Charities  to  the  poor  commendable, 
101. 

Charles  I.,  King,  his  vow  to  restore 
church  property,  284  n. 

Chartophylax.     [See  Clergy.] 

Chasuble,  143. 

Cheese,  as  used  in  Armenia,  is  for- 
bidden in  Lent,  391. 

Child  unborn  has  no  part  in  the 
mother's  baptism,  82 ;  under 
his  father  for  nurture  and 
training,  98. 

Children,  must  not  be  neglected  on 
any  pretence  of  piety,  98 ; 
must  honor  their  parents,  es- 
pecially believers,  99;  must 
not  withhold  reverence  from 
them  on  any  plea  of  piety,  99. 

Choir  offices,  excursus  on,  134,  35  , 
their  origin  in  the  Jewish,  134  , 
theories  as  to  their  origin,  134. 

Chorepiscopi,  excursus  on,  21  seq. 
[See  Clergy.] 

Chrism  for  anointing  converted 
heretics,  127  ;  must  follow  bap- 
tism, 154,  154  ;  called  "  the 
heavenly,"  154,  154  ;  on  the 
forehead  of  the  baptized,  154  ; 
as  related  to  confirmation, 
154 ;  its  consecration  and  the 
rites  thereat,  154,  610  ;  restric- 
tions as  to  the  persons  making 
it,  445,  446 ;  and  on  their  us- 
ing it,  446. 

Christ,  his  last  acts,  56  ;  in  relation 
to  the  Logos,  174,  175,  176; 
"  one  only  Christ  both  God  and 
Man  at  the  same  time,"  210, 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


637 


210  seq.  ;  the  union  of  natures 
in  Christ  is  hypostatic,  211 ; 
cannot  be  spoken  of  as  two 
persons  or  subsistences,  211; 
scripture  expressions  belong 
to  Him  as  one  person,  211 ; 
how  He  increased  in  wisdom 
and  stature,  212 ;  His  Hu- 
miliation, 211,  212;  is  Very 
God,  and  not  Theophorus 
(God-bearing),  212  ;  heresy  to 
say  He  is  only  energized  by  the 
Word  of  God,  213;  heresy  to 
say  the  glory  of  the  Only  Be- 
gotten is  not  properly  His,  213, 
219 ;  Nestorius's  account  of 
His  working  miracles,  214, 215 
seq. ;  Nestorius's  account  of 
His  glorification  by  the  Holy 
Ghost,  214, 215  seq.  ;  excursus 
on  how  He  worked  miracles, 
215  seq.  ;  His  relation  to  the 
Holy  Ghost,  215 ;  discussion 
at  Chalcedon  on  "  of  "  or  "  in  " 
two  natures,  263  seq.  ;  the 
union  in  Him  as  differently 
understood,  312  ;  only  one  Hy- 
postasis or  Person,  312  seq., 
335,  340,  341,  345,  347 ;  the 
union  is  not  relative  but  real, 
in  One  Person,  312,  313,  322 ; 
how  He  ought  and  ought  not 
to  be  worshipped,  314,  322 ; 
true  God,  Lord  of  Glory, 
One  of  the  Trinity,  314,  340, 
346,  347 ;  Origenistic  ideas  of 
His  assuming  angelic  forms, 
318  seq. ;  Origenistic  ideas  of 
His  relation  to  angels  and  de- 
mons, 319 ;  the  teaching  of 
Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  upon, 
322;  question  of  the  one  will  in 
Christ,  327,  330  seq.,  342seq., 
345,  347 ;  the  two  natures,  two 
natural  wills  and  operations, 
330  seq.,  345,  347  ;  set  the  ex- 
ample of  celibacy,  365  ;  Virgin 
Christ  and  Virgin  Mary,  367  ; 
was  born  without  parturition, 
399,  400 ;  speculations  on  the 
mode  of  His  birth,  400 ;  the 
time  of  His  resurrection  is 
unknown,  403;  one  denying 
Christ  and  repenting  may  be 
received  on  his  death-bed,  609. 

Christianity  decreed  to  be  taken  at 
one's  own  free  choice,  496. 

Christians,  some  tried  a  compro- 
mise with  idolatry,  66  ;  must 
not  leave  the  church  and  invoke 
angels,  150 ;  must  not  join  in 
wanton  wedding  dances,  156, 
157 ;  should  only  modestly 
dine  or  breakfast  at  a  wedding, 
156  ;  must  observe  their  Chris- 
tian standing,  157  ;  shall  not 
take  oil  to  heathen  temples, 
598  ;  or  to  the  synagogues  of 
the  Jews,  598. 

Christians  plundering  Christians 
during  a  heathen  invasion  shall 
be  excommunicated,  602. 

1  Chron.  xxix.  20,  527. 


Chrysostom,  80,  33,  52,  114,  132, 
281,  303,  379,  545  ;  canon  used 
against,  110,  114 ;  was  de- 
fended in  canon,  379,  380. 

Church,  arrangement  in  the  build- 
ing, 25,  26 ;  leaving  it  without 
theEucharistisforbidden,108, 
109  ;  and  without  the  prayers, 
108, 109;  leaving  it  "by  rea- 
son of  some  disorder"  is  for- 
bidden, 108 ;  forbidden  to 
receive  in  one  church  malcon- 
tents of  another,  109 ;  its  ap- 
peal to  the  civil  power,  110, 
111 ;  its  good  to  be  considered, 
118 ;  its  property  under  the 
bishop,  with  the  knowledge  of 
all  the  clergy,  120,  121;  its 
property  must  always  be 
known  and  carefully  adminis- 
tered, 120,  121,  614  ;  its  prop- 
erty must  not  be  lost  or  em- 
bezzled, 120,  121,  614;  its 
funds  are  administered  by  the 
bishop  and  clergy,  121  ;  its 
rent  of  farms,  121 ;  embezzle- 
ment of  its  property  forbidden, 
69,  95,  285,  455,  457;  recov- 
ery of  property  lies  on  the 
bishop,  69 ;  evils  in  a  vacancy 
of,  69,  285  ;  spoken  against  by 
the  Eustathians,  91,  94;  her 
first  fruits  squandered  by  the 
Eustathians,  91,  95 ;  sacred- 
ness  of  her  property,  95,  285, 
455  ;  public  readings  in,  394  ; 
no  beasts  or  cattle  shall  be 
driven  into,  except  under  neces- 
sity, 403 ;  must  have  no  boil- 
ing of  meat  in  the  sanctuary, 
407,  407  ;  offerings  of  cooked 
meat  are  to  be  made  outside 
the  church,  407;  her  income 
taken  charge  of  by  the  steward 
during  a  vacancy,  285 ;  re- 
garded as  widowed,  285,  285; 
must  have  a  steward  to  act 
under  the  bishop,  285  ;  in  all 
the  world  should  follow  one 
rule,  391 ;  her  music  and  sing- 
ing, 398;  is  defiled  by  connec- 
tion of  husband  and  wife,  406 ; 
her  goods  shall  not  be  sold, 
455  ;  if  it  be  of  necessity  let  it 
be  laid  before  Metropolitan 
and  bishops,  455  ;  the  Metro- 
politan is  responsible  if  he 
sell  without  consulting,  455 ; 
a  small  country  church  called 
titulus,  458. 
Church,  teaches  the  traditional 
faith,  2  ;  the  Catholic  and  the 
Apostolic,  19, 185;  may  receive 
back  the  Cathari,  19;  receive 
heretics  into  communion  on 
definite  profession,  19;  ar- 
rangement of  the  worshippers, 
31 ;  the  Catholic,  19,  23 ;  the 
holy  and  great  synod  of  the 
church,  31,  32 ;  recognized  and 
had  a  distinct  hierarchy,  39 ; 
obedience  required  to  what  is 
rightly  ordained  in  the,  108; 


obedience  to,  under  pain  of  ex- 
communication, 109;  its  faith 
is  not  for  private  judgment, 
108 ;  prescribes  certain  fasts, 
100  ;  her  prescribed  fasts  are 
not  to  be  neglected,  100 ;  mem- 
bers of  the  church  or  Ecclesias- 
tici,  129 ;  the  one  holy  Catholic 
and  apostolic,  164 ;  becoming 
stronger  in  moral  and  spiritual 
force,  382,  382  ;  lessening  the 
age  of  entering  orders,  384  ; 
"  go  to  a  Catholic  church," 
392 ;  the  Catholic  church 
spread  abroad  throughout  all 
the  world,  431. 

Church,  in  Africa,  followed  the 
civil  reckoning  for  dates,  485  ; 
at  The  Oaks  near  Chalcedon 
was  consecrated,  512 ;  her 
property  is  under  the  charge  of 
the  bishop,  596;  the  church's 
property  and  the  bishop's  must 
be  distinct,  596  ;  the  property 
of  neither  must  suffer  from  the 
other  on  any  pretext,  596  ;  any 
one  stealing  the  sacred  vessels 
or  the  holy  veil  shall  be  ex- 
communicated, 598  ;  any  one 
converting  them  to  his  own 
use  shall  be  excommunicated, 
598;  its  vexations  and  abuses 
under  the  barbarians,  602, 
609;  order  preserved  by  in- 
dulgence in  barbarian  disor- 
ders, 382;  in  city,  village, 
martyry  or  monastery,  271; 
the  Catholic,  278. 

Church,  of  Bulgaria,  177;  of  Cy- 
prus, 177  ;  of  England,  her  eu- 
charistic  teaching,  39  ;  of  Ibe- 
ria, 177. 

Churches,  as  houses  of  God, 
spoken  against  by  Eustathians, 
91,  94;  the  despising  them  is 
forbidden  at  Gangra,  94;  the 
speaking  against  them  is  com- 
mon in  all  ages,  94;  opposi- 
tion assemblies  are  forbidden 
at  Gangra,  94 ;  not  to  be  for- 
saken for  private  assemblies, 
109,  109 ;  not  to  be  forsaken 
for  the  invocation  of  angels, 
150,  150  ;  the  singing  is  not 
to  be  shouting  in,  398 ;  should 
not  be  eating  places,  or  for 
selling  food,  398 ;  no  place  of 
sale  or  exchange,  398,  399 ; 
their  consecration,  560;  relics 
used  at  the  consecration,  or 
deposited  after,  560 ;  were  pol- 
luted, abused  and  destroyed  by 
the  Iconoclasts,  564,  564 ; 
canon  of  Nicsea  II.  directs  their 
recovery,  564;  to  be  rever- 
enced as  God's  houses,  101, 
146,  148  ;  their  assemblies  are 
holy  and  healthful,  101 ;  gath- 
erings in,  are  for  the  common 
profit,  101 ;  agapae  may  not 
beheld  in  them,  148,  398,  461 ; 
not  to  be  used  for  eating,  or 
spreading    couches    in,    148, 


638 


INDEX   OF  SUBJECTS 


398  ;  called  the  Lord's  House, 
and  the  House  of  God,  148; 
in  heathen  nations,  must  be 
governed  by  ancient  custom, 
177. 

Civil  power,  appealed  to  by  the 
church,  110,  111  ;  appeals  to 
are  restricted  and  regulated, 
114,  114;  is  used  as  a  means 
for  ecclesiastical  disturbance, 
283,  284. 

Clement,  two  epistles  and  con- 
stitutions of,  600. 

Clement  V.  commenced  the  Clem- 
entines, xxxv. 


CLERGY    AND    CLERICAL 

CONNEXIONS. 

Abbess,  head  of  monastery  for 
women,  565  ;  has  less  general 
power  than  an  abbot,  565 ; 
shall  not  receive  any  into  her 
monastery  for  a  money  gift, 
567. 

Abbot,  must  be  under  the  bishop, 
270. 

Acolyte,  history  of  the  office, 
144  seq.  ;  an  official  of  the 
Roman  temple,  145,  146. 

Adjure,  part  of  the  exorcist's 
office,  147  ;  none  can,  but 
those  promoted  to  the  office 
by  the  bishop,  147;  done  in 
church  or  in  private  house, 
147. 

Advocate,  is  on  the  church  roll, 
268,  559;  may  be  punished 
for  simony,  268,  559;  ZkSikos, 
defensor,  268 ;  office  was  held 
by  ecclesiastics,  268 ;  Protec- 
dicos  acted  as  judge,  268, 
284 ;  shall  not  be  advanced 
for  money,  559. 

Alexandria,  bishop  of,  has  juris- 
diction over  Egypt,  176. 

Anchorite  life  and  its  probations, 
385. 

Archbishop,  absolves  in  unjust  dis- 
cipline, 46,  48;  must  give 
consent  to  an  Episcopal  elec- 
tion, 46 ;  his  enthronization, 
50. 

Archdeacon,  his  rank  and  duty, 
49,  285,  286  ;  was  replaced  by 
the  Steward,  285,  286.  [See 
Steward.] 

Archpriest,  49. 

Bishop,  excursus  on  the  translation 
of,  1 ,  415  seq. ;  shall  not  be  a 
recent  convert,  10,  425  ;  ap- 
pointed by  all  the  bishops  in 
the  province,  11, 12,  117, 118, 
131,  420,  448, 557  ;  appointed 
by  at  least  three  of  the  provin- 
cial bishops,  11,  12,  448;  ap- 
pointed with  the  written  suf- 
frages of  the  absent  bishops, 

11,  12,  117,  118,  448,  557; 
his  appointment  to  be  con- 
firmed by  the  Metropolitan,  11, 

12,  15,  46,  117,  420,  448  ;  his 


Clergy —  Continued. 

ordination,  11,  12,  117,  420, 
425,  448,  460,  557,  594;  his 
election,  11,12,  15,  15,  16,  46, 
118,  131,  416,  426,  426,  557  ; 
how  nominated,  12  ;  his  ordi- 
nation by  three  bishops,  12, 
420,  557;  his  election  by  a 
majority  of  bishops,  15,  117, 
131,  557;  never  two  equal  in 
one  city,  20,  22,  48 ;  may  be 
lowered  to  the  rank  of  a  pres- 
byter, 22,  71 ;  crimes  for  which 
the  bishop  is  punishable,  23, 
24,  46,  50,  119,  428,  429; 
punishable  equally  with  a  pres- 
byter, 23;  must  respect  ex- 
communication by  another 
bishop,  13,  46,  109,  427, 
510,  594;  must  not  excom 
municate  through  captiousness 
or  contention,  13,  428,  429, 
507 ;  he  laid  hands  on  the 
prostrator  penitents,  26  ;  was 
judge  in  the  public  penance, 
27,  28,  29,  63,  74  ;  giving  the 
viaticum,  29 ;  laid  hands  on 
catechumens,  32  ;  forbidden  to 
go  from  city  to  city,   32,  46, 

115,  118,  119,  176,  271,415, 
416,  594 ;  must  have  fair  trial, 
48  ;  if  married  before  ordina- 
tion, 51,  370,  388  ;  had  power 
in  questions  of  penance,  63, 
65,  66,  74,  462,  608,  609; 
he  must  confine  his  ordina- 
tions to  his  own  clergy,  35, 
47,  115,  119,  176,  429,  468, 
596;  has  his  ordinations  can- 
celled by  irregularity,  35, 115, 
119,  429;  concelebrating,  39; 
a  custom  in  ordaining  a  bish- 
op or  presbyter,  39  ;  must  not 
live  with  women,  46,  388, 
567  ;  if  he  forces  his  election, 
46  ;  must  avoid  irregularities 
in  ordination,  46,  115,  176, 
428, 429,  599;  is  to  be  honored 
by  presbyters  and  deacons, 
46;  shall  not  choose  his  suc- 
cessor, 48,  119;  judge  in  di- 
vorce, 48;  his  enthronization, 
50 ;  a  celibate,  51  ;  some 
were  married,  52,  388;  he 
may  allow  a  deacon  to  be  mar- 
ried, 67,  67  ;  has  power  of  dis- 
pensation, 67,  363  ;  must  not 
usurp  another  parish,  71,  115, 

116,  118,  119,  176,  416,  594; 
if  expelled  from  another  par- 
ish, 71 ;  his  consent  confirms 
the  presbyter  in  acting,  94, 
94,  95,  158 ;  must  observe 
the  Nicsean  Easter  on  pain  of 
deposition,  108 ;  excommuni- 
cated for  communicating  with 
one  excommunicated,  109, 
447,  594,  595  ;  must  recall  or 
depose  an  absenting  deacon  or 
presbyter,  109;  must  not  nul- 
lify the  ecclesiastical  laws, 
109, 119  ;  to  be  deposed  for  re- 
ceiving the  deposed  of  another 


Clergy—  Continued. 

parish,  109,  110,  594;  if  de- 
posed, he  can  exercise  no  part 
of  his  ministry,  110,  594 ;  ap- 
pealed against  to  synod  by 
priest  or  deacon  or  laity,  111, 
507 ;  his  excommunication 
stands  unless  altered  by  syn- 
od, 111;  must  acknowledge 
his  metropolitan,  112,  113, 
428,  596 ;  the  position  and 
duties  of  a  bishop,  112,  113, 
594,  596 ;  appeal  to  the  Em- 
peror restricted,  114,  423, 
424;  must  have  metropolitan's 
consent   for  an   appeal,    114, 

424  ;  if  deposed  by  a  synod 
may  appeal  to  the  great  synod 
of  bishops,  114,  183,  418;  if 
deposed  by  a  synod,  may  not 
appeal  to  the  Emperor,"  114, 
183,  420;  if  deposed  by  a 
synod,  must  abide  by  the  deci- 
sion of  the  greater  synod,  114, 
183 ;  cannot  ordain  in  another 
province  without  consent  of 
the  other  metropolitan  and 
bishops,  115,  119,  176,  429, 
594,  596  ;  has  no  jurisdiction 
or  power  in  another  province, 
115, 119, 176, 428,  596 ;  must 
suffer  deposition  for  irregular- 
ity and  interference,  115,  119, 

425  seq. ;  if  condemned  by  a 
divided  judgment,  he  may  ap- 
peal to  other  bishops,  115, 
418;  if  condemned  by  unani- 
mous decision,  he  has  no  ap- 
peal, 115,  116  ;  shall  not  seize 
a  vacant  throne,  even  with  the 
people's  consent,  116;  when 
ordained,  may  be  rejected  by 
his  parish,  117,  596  ;  when  or- 
dained must  accept  the  church 
intrusted  to  him,  116,  696; 
if  he  refuse  to  accept  and 
serve,  he  shall  be  excommuni- 
cated, 116,  596  ;  his  case  lies 
for  decision  by  a  full  synod  of 
bishops,  116;  one  rejected  by 
his  parish,  for  no  fault  of  his, 
retains  his  rank  and  ministry, 
117,  117,  382,383,  596;  the 
case  of  one  thus  rejected  is  de- 
termined by  a  full  synod,  117  ; 
he  shall  not  disturb  the  affairs 
of  another  church,  117,  119, 
176,  594 ;  he  must  remain  quiet 
until  his  case  is  determined, 
117  ;  not  to  be  ordained  with- 
out a  synod  and  metropolitan, 
117,  131;  not  to  be  ordained 
without  a  majority  present  or 
assenting,  117;  his  ordination, 
if  contrary  to  canon,  is  in- 
valid, 117  ;  any  later  objection 
to  his  ordination  is  to  be  set- 
tled by  a  majority,  117;  may 
not  be  translated  from  parish 
to  parish,  118,  415,  594;  is 
not  to  intrude  himself  into  n 
vacant  parish,  118,  176,  594 
must    remain    in    the    parish 


INDEX   OP  SUBJECTS 


639 


Clergy —  Continued. 

given  him  by  God,  118,  594  ; 
is  not  to  be  translated  by  com- 
pulsion of  the  bishops,  118, 
594;  can  ordain  in  another 
jurisdiction  ■with  the  other 
bishop's  consent,  119;  for  ir- 
regularity a  bishop  is  amena- 
ble to  the  synod,  119;  his  in- 
terference in  another  parish 
must  have  been  frequent,  119  ; 
if  chosen  by  his  predecessor- 
he  is  disqualified,  119;  must 
be  appointed  by  a  synod,  and 
with  the  judgment  of  the  bish- 
ops, 119,  120;  a  coadjutor 
cum  jure  successions,  120  ;  with 
the  presbyters  and  deacons, 
bishop  has  charge  of  all  church 
property,  120,  120,  121,  596  ; 
his  property  at  his  decease 
must  be  honestly  cared  for, 
120,  596 ;  his  heirs  must  not 
be  vexed  and  harried  with 
lawsuits,  120,  596;  he  may 
bequeath  all  his  private  prop- 
erty to  any  one,  120,  596  ;  he 
controls  the  funds  of  the 
church,  121,  596 ;  must  dis- 
pense them  in  piety  and  godly 
fear,  121,  596 ;  may  apply 
church  -  funds  to  necessary 
uses,  121,  596 ;  shall  not  ap- 
propriate or  waste  church  rev- 
enue, 121,  283,  381,  458, 
596 ;  shall  not  allow  friends 
or  relatives  to  do  so,  121, 
696;  if  accused  of  dishonest 
dealing,  he  shall  appeal  to  the 
synod,  121,  183 ;  qualifica- 
tions necessary  for  his  elec- 
tion, 131 ;  not  to  be  elected 
by  popular  tumult,  131,  415 ; 
his  sermon  in  the  liturgy, 
136, 138  ;  his  place  and  duty 
in  the  liturgy,  136,  138, 
139 ;  his  place  among  the 
clergy,  140 ;  his  distinctive 
dress,  141,  142  ;  wore  golden 
mitre  or  fillet,  141  ;  when 
called  to  a  synod,  he  must  at- 
tend, 152,  282,  420;  and 
either  teach  or  be  taught, 
152 ;  he  can  only  be  excused 
by  ill-health  from  attending 
synod,  152,  282  ;  or  by  other 
unavoidable  hindrance,  152, 
282 ;  should  not  be  guilty  of 
contempt,  152,  282;  enters 
the  bema  accompanied  by  the 
clergy,  157  ;  presbyters  form 
the  bishop's  guard  of  honour, 
157,  158  ;  must  not  be  appoint- 
ed in  village  or  country  dis- 
trict, 158;  must  not  make  the 
oblation  in  a  private  house, 
152;  the  bishops  of  the  east 
are  to  manage  the  east  alone, 
176  ;  the  bishops  of  the  Asian 
diocese  administer  Asian  af- 
fairs alone,  176;  the  Pontic 
bishops  administer  only  Pontic 
matters,  176;  and  the  Thra- 


Clergy —  Continued. 

cian  bishops  only  Thracian 
affairs,  176;  his  enthroniza- 
tion,  177 ;  one  setting  aside 
the  decrees  of  the  Council  of 
Ephesus  shall  be  deposed,  230; 
one  teaching  contrary  to  the 
faith  established  at  Nicsea 
shall  be  deposed,  231 ;  is  not 
to  ordain  for  money  payment, 
268,  559,  595 ;  is  not  to  sell  a 
grace  which  cannot  be  sold, 
268,  559 ;  shall  not  be  or- 
dained simoniacally,  268, 559, 
595  ;  simoniacal  ordination  is 
invalid,  268 ;  must  not  engage 
in  secular  management,  269, 
599  ;  he  may  be  called  by  law 
to  manage  for  orphans,  etc., 
269;  must  be  watchful  over 
the  monks,  270  ;  is  judge,  in 
the  first  instance,  between  cler- 
gy, 274 ;  against  another  bish- 
op appeals  to  the  synod  of  the 
province,  274,  417  ;  against 
his  metropolitan  appeals  to  the 
Exarch  of  the  diocese,  274; 
against  his  Exarch  appeals  to 
the  Patriarch  in  Constantino- 
ple, 274 ;  appealing  to  secular 
powers  to  divide  a  province 
he  shall  be  degraded,  276-7  ; 
may  grant  indulgence  to  his 
virgins  and  monks,  280; 
charges  against  one  shall  not 
be  loosely  received,  283 ;  the 
accuser  of  a  bishop  must  have 
his  own  character  investigated, 
283,  446,  451 ;  often  accused 
slanderously  in  order  to  cause 
confusion,  183,  446 ;  the  ac- 
cusers must  be  strictly  exam- 
ined, 183,  283 ;  all  accusers 
are  not  to  be  received  or  all 
excluded,  183,  446  ;  accusers 
of  a  bishop  for  fraud  and  such 
things  have  open  court,  183 ; 
heretic  may  not  accuse  a  bish- 
op on  ecclesiastical  grounds, 
183  ;  neither  may  one  be  ex- 
communicated, 183;  those  un- 
der charge  of  faults  cannot  ac- 
cuse until  themselves  cleared, 
183  ;  an  eligible  accuser  brings 
the  case  first  before  the  pro- 
vincial bishops,  183  ;  then  the 
case  may  be  appealed  to  the 
bishops  of  the  diocese,  183; 
but  the  case  should  not  be  car- 
ried before  the  Emperor  or 
ecumenical  synod,  183;  the 
goods  of  a  bishop  deceased 
shall  not  be  seized  by  the  cler- 
gy, 283,  381,  596  ;  shall  have 
a  steward  to  manage  the 
church's  business,  235,  476 ; 
may  not  be  married  before  or 
after  ordination,  363  ;  deposed 
if  he  has  had  intercourse  with 
a  nun,  364  ;  shall  not  put  away 
his  wife  on  pretence  of  piety, 
370,  594;  was  allowed  by 
Eastern  custom  to   have  his 


Clergy —  Continued. 

wife,  371  ;  the  higher  aim  of 
bishop's  position,  371  ;  depriv- 
ing for  lawful  cohabitation 
he  shall  be  deposed,  371;  age 
for  consecration,  372,  372 ;  the 
name  a  later  introduction  be- 
hind apostle,  373;  liable  to 
deposition  for  receiving  a  cleric 
who  should  have  gone  home, 

374,  595 ;  shall  not  teach 
publicly  in  any  foreign  city, 

375,  594;  under  pain  of  act- 
ing only  as  a  presbyter,  375  ; 
on  his  consecration  he  must 
remove  his  wife  to  a  distance, 
388 ;  supports  his  wife  who  is 
so  removed,  388 ;  they  must 
separate  by  mutual  consent, 
388 ;  absent  three  Sundays 
from  church  without  necessity, 
he  is  under  penalty,  400,425  ; 
opinion  upon  bishop's  transla- 
tions, 415  ;  shall  not  be  elected 
by  bribery  or  intrigue,  416  ; 
or  on  fraudulent  commenda- 
tions, 416;  one  so  appointed 
is  deprived  of  communion  even 
in  extremis,  416,  416;  was  in 
earlier  days  elected  by  the  peo- 
ple, 416,  426 ;  shall  not  pass 
uncalled  into  another  province, 
416,  594 ;  his  form  of  proced- 
ure in  dispute  with  another 
bishop,  417  ;  his  appeal  to  Ju- 
lius, bishop  of  Rome,  417, 
417  seq.,  418,  418  seq.  ;  shall 
not  be  ordained  for  a  village  or 
petty  town,  420,  421  ;  let  him 
be  ordained  for  a  former  see  or 
large  town,  420,  421  ;  should 
specially  care  for  the  widows 
and  orphans,  422  ;  should  not 
go  up  to  court  unless  sum- 
moned by  letter,  422 ;  and 
then  use  his  influence  for  truth 
and  right,  422 ;  was  often 
summoned  by  the  princes  for 
consultation  and  advice,  422 ; 
should  not  be  long  absent  from 
his  diocese,  422  ;  should  inter- 
cede at  court  for  criminals, 
422  ;  on  appeal  to  court  he 
should  send  a  deacon  as  dele- 
gate, 423  ;  the  bishop's  going 
to  court  excites  jealousy  and 
suspicion,  423,  423  ;  the  form 
of  procedure  in  sending  a  pe- 
tition to  court,  423  seq.,  432, 
502  ;  may  use  the  influence  of 
friends  at  court,  423,  424 ; 
must  have  passed  slowly 
through  all  the  orders  of  the 
priesthood,  424,  425 ;  must 
have  shown  himself  worthy  of 
the  episcopate,  425 ;  should 
not  have  been  merely  a  rich 
man,  or  lawyer,  or  courtier, 
425 ;  should  not  be  a  novice, 
425,  599 ;  stranger  shall  not 
boast  and  bring  the  proper 
bishop  into  contempt,  425, 
426 ;   stranger  shall  not    in- 


640 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


Clergy —  Continued. 

trigue  and  procure  a  transla- 
tion, 426  ;  some  bishops  have 
large  estates,  426 ;  directions 
for  their  attending  to  their 
private  affairs,  426  ;  shall  not 
excommunicate  his  clergy  pas- 
sionately, 428,  442  ;  must  sub- 
mit to  having  the  whole  case 
reopened  and  judged,  428, 
442  ;  shall  have  to  show  cause 
before  the  Metropolitan  court, 
428,  442 ;  shall  not  ordain  a 
minister  whom  he  has  taken 
from  another  bishop,  429, 
468 ;  must  have  sincere  love 
and  regard  for  his  clergy,  428 ; 
driven  by  violence  from  his 
see,  he  should  be  received  by 
other  bishops,  431 ;  suffering 
in  persecution  he  should  be  re- 
ceived in  kindness,  431 ;  the 
title  has  been  brought  into  con- 
demnation, 432 ;  those  who 
cause  offence  will  be  held  by 
the  other  bishops  answerable, 
432 ;  inquiry  to  be  made 
about  a  stranger  bishop,  432  ; 
mode  of  inquiring  about  the 
stranger  in  the  city,  432 ; 
caution  and  tact  in  the  inquiry 
about  the  stranger,  433 ;  shall 
be  chaste  and  continent,  444, 
445,  454,  478 ;  if  accused  of 
crime  he  appeal  to  a  secular 
court,  he  loses  his  office,  449  ; 
his  sons  should  not  seek  secu- 
lar spectacles,  449 ;  he  may 
not  be  "  conductor  "  or  "  proc- 
urator," 450;  if  accused,  he 
shall  have  due  trial  before  the 
Synod  of  Primates,  451;  and 
shall  have  time  and  opportu- 
nity to  argue  his  case,  451 ; 
but  if  he  decline  to  attend,  it 
will  be  held  as  confession  of 
guilt,  451 ;  conditions  of  the 
trial  for  accused  and  accuser, 
441 ;  accused  bishop  shall 
come  first  before  his  own  pri- 
mate, 451,  502  ;  shall  give  no 
donation  to  a  non-Catholic, 
even  though  a  relative,  453 ; 
shall  not  go  beyond  seas,  with- 
out his  primate's  commenda- 
tory letter,  453, 470  ;  shall  not 
sell  church  property,  unknown 
to  the  council  and  presbyters, 

458  ;  or  appropriate  what  be- 
longs to  his  mother  church  or 
cathedral,  458  ;  shall  not  easily 
set  his  sons  free,  459 ;  until 
they  are  of  age,  and  are  re- 
sponsible for  their  own   sins, 

459  ;  not  to  be  ordained  until 
all  his  household  is  Christian, 
460 ;  shall  not  feast  in  church, 
461 ;  except  when  compelled 
by  necessity  of  hospitality, 
461  ;  one  ordained  by  only 
two  Numidian  bishops,  465 ; 
question  discussed  as  to  twelve 
bishops  being  necessary,  465 ; 


Clergy —  Continued. 

decided  in  favor  of  at  least 
three  bishops  consecrating, 
465 ;  he  of  Carthage  can  or- 
dain a  bishop  at  his  discretion, 
468-9;  each  shall  hold  the 
see  for  which  he  was  ordained, 
469,  470,  594;  for  making 
strangers,  heretics  or  pagans  his 
heirs,  one  is  severely  blamed, 
481 ;  dying  intestate  he  is 
blamed,  481 ;  should  discoun- 
tenance false  memories  of  mar- 
tyrs, 482;  should  have  false 
memorials  thrown  down,  482  ; 
no  one  shall  alone,  takecogniz- 
anceof  a  cause  496;  neglecting 
his  diocese  he  shall  be  deprived 
of  communion,  502,  597  ;  shall 
be  energetic  against  heresies 
and  heretics,  501,  502 ;  re- 
vealing a  confession,  he  need 
not  be  believed,  505 ;  shall  not 
excommunicate  without  suffi- 
cient evidence  of  wrong,  505  ; 
shall  be  excommunicated  if 
he  excommunicate  unreason- 
ably, 505,  506 ;  shall  not  be 
listened  to  when  coming  from 
a  distance,  510;  shall  not  be 
deposed  by  two  or  even  three 
bishops,  513 ;  of  Bostra  was  ir- 
regularly deposed,  by  two  bish- 
ops, 513,  514  ;  each  has  the 
license  of  liberty,  power  and 
will,  517;  must  know  the 
Psalter  by  heart,  556;  must 
be  prepared  before  ordination 
to  observe  the  canons,  556 ; 
his  intimate  knowledge  of 
Scripture,  556  ;  a  bishop's  elec- 
tion by  a  prince  is  null,  557  ; 
must  be  chosen  by  Bishops, 
557;  shall  not  extort  money 
or  gifts  from  any  one  subject  to 
him,  557,  658;  shall  not  exact 
money  by  closing  churches 
excommunicating,  etc.,  568 ; 
some  received  their  ordination 
by  a  money  payment,  559 ; 
those  boasting  such  a  fact  over 
a  poor  brother  are  to  be  degrad- 
ed or  fined,  559  ;  shall  not  be 
ordained  for  money,  268, 
559  ;  shall  not  alienate  any  of 
the  church's  farm  lands,  563  ; 
or  surrender  them  to  any  other 
person,  563  ;  shall  appropriate 
nothing  to  himself,  563;  or 
confer  anything  on  his  poor 
relations,  563;  shall  not 
squander  and  say  the  land  is 
unprofitable,  563  ;  shall  give, 
if  he  give  at  all,  to  clergymen 
and  husbandmen,  563;  if  he 
does  not  partake  he  must  give 
a  reasonable  excuse,  594; 
must  not  have  been  digamist 
after  baptism,  595 ;  or  have  a 
concubine,  595 ;  if  guilty  of 
fornication,  perjury  or  theft, 
he  shall  be  deposed,  595; 
who  strikes  any  one,  shall  be 


C  lergy —  Continued . 

deposed,  595 ;  if  justly  de- 
posed he  shall  not  meddle  with 
divine  offices,  595;  obtaining 
a  church  through  the  civil 
power,  he  shall  be  deposed  and 
excommunicated,  595 ;  in 
matters  of  discipline  shall  give 
three  admonitions,  595,  599  ; 
foreign  bishops  shall  not  be 
received  without  letters  com- 
mendatory, 596 ;  and  even 
then,  not  without  further  close 
examination,  596 ;  every 
bishop  must  acknowledge  his 
superior  and  do  nothing  with- 
out his  consent,  596 ;  but  must 
attend  to  his  own  parish  and 
country  places,  596 ;  the  chief 
bishop  must  do  nothing  with- 
out the  consent  of  all,  596 ; 
all  must  seek  after  unity  and 
unanimity,  596;  bishops  shall 
meet  twice  a  year,  596  ;  shall 
examine  decrees  and  settle 
ecclesiastical  controversies, 
596;  shall  meet  in  Pentecost 
and  October,  596;  shall  have 
full  control  over  their  own 
property,  596 ;  shall  make  a 
clear  distinction  between  their 
own  and  the  church's,  596; 
shall  distribute  freely  to  the 
clergy  and  in  hospitality,  596  ; 
shall  supply  his  own  needs 
and  the  needs  of  others,  596 ; 
shall  not  be  given  to  dice  or 
drinking,  597 ;  he  who  has 
prayed  with  heretics  shall  be 
excommunicated,  597  ;  but  if 
he  has  allowed  them  to  per- 
form any  clerical  office,  de- 
posed, 597 ;  he  who  has  al- 
lowed the  baptism  or  sacrifice 
of  heretics  shall  be  deposed, 

597  ;  shall  baptize  iDto  the 
Father,  the  Son  and  the  Holy 
Ghost,  597  ;  shall  not  baptize 
into  other  names,  597 ;  shall 
baptize  with  three  immersions 
and  not  with  only  one,  597 ; 
shall  not  abstain  from  mar- 
riage, flesh  or  wine  as  abhor- 
ring them,  597;  shall  not  refuse 
flesh  and  wine  on  festival  days, 
597 ;  for  negligence  or  idle- 
ness shall  be  excommunicated, 
597 ;  shall  supply  the  needs  of 
any  of  the  clergy  in  want, 
598 ;  shall  not  eat  flesh  with 
the  blood,  or  killed  by  beast, 
or  naturally  died,  598 ;  if  in  a 
contest  he  kill  anyone  with 
one  blow  let  him  be  deposed, 

598  ;  shall  observe  the  fasts, 
unless  hindered  by  infirmity, 
598  ;  shall  not  keep  fast  or 
feast  with  the  Jews,  598 ;  shall 
not  receive  gift  of  unleavened 
bread  or  other  such  from  the 
Jews,  598  ;  if  credibly  ac- 
cused shall  be  tried  by  the 
bishops,  599;  and  on  refusal 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


641 


Clergy —  Continued. 

to  attend,  shall  be  three  times 
duly  summoned,  599;  but  if 
he  still  refuse,  he  shall  be  duly 
sentenced,  599;  shall  not,  out 
of  favor,  ordain  any  relation 
to  be  bishop,  599;  or  make 
the  church  subject  to  heirs, 
599;  a  man  lame,  or  blind  in 
one  eye,  but  otherwise  worthy, 
may  be  made  bishop,  599;  one 
deaf  or  blind  may  not  be  made 
bishop,  599;  shall  not  give 
himself  to  the  management  of 
public  affairs,  599  ;  but  must 
devote  himself  to  ecclesiastical 
business,  599;  shall  not  serve 
in  the  army,  and  remain  bish- 
op, 599. 

Bishops,  were  anciently  called 
Popes,  118  ;  and  presbyters  of 
the  church,  128;  are  said  to 
have  the  administration  of  the 
churches,  183 ;  are  slandered 
in  order  to  confuse  ecclesiasti- 
cal order,  183;  how  accusa- 
tions against  them  are  to  be 
treated,  183;  only  certain 
classes  of  persons  can  bring  a 
charge  against,  183;  have 
their  synods  of  the  province 
for  trial  and  appeal,  183 ;  may 
not  appeal  to  Emperor,  tem- 
poral judge  or  ecumenical  syn- 
od, 183 ;  one  who  so  appeals 
may  not  be  an  accuser,  183; 
a  bishop's  accuser  stands  under 
the  lex.  talionis,  183,  184 ;  are 
forbidden  under  penalties  to 
join  the  Nestorians,  225,  228, 
230,  231;  must  attend  provin- 
cial synods,  282;  cannot  be 
degraded  to  the  rank  of  pres- 
byter, 290;  may  not  be  mar- 
ried men,  363;  cause  scandal 
by  living  with  their  wives  after 
consecration,  370;  the  living 
with  their  wives  is  forbidden 
on  pain  of  deposition,  370; 
shall  be  deposed  for  celebrating 
without  wine  and  water  mixed, 
380;  one  has  all  his  rights 
preserved  when  he  is  oppressed 
by  barbarians,  382  ;  their  or- 
dinations are  valid  in  times  of 
disorder  from  barbarians,  382 ; 
inpartibus  infidelium,  383  ;  the 
order  of  precedence  is  to  be  ob- 
served among  them,  483-4; 
those  ordained  in  Africa  shall 
receive  letters  of.  orders  duly 
attested  with  dates,  etc.,  435; 
decreed  that  people  who  have 
not  had  bishops,  shall  not  re- 
ceive them  at  once,  492  ;  dele- 
gate their  power  to  a  commit- 
tee of  synod,  503;  fifteen 
elected  for  the  five  African 
provinces,  503J;  enjoined  to 
study  one's  duty  by  the  7th 
ecumenical  synod,  555 ;  set 
on  a  higher  level  for  example 
in  purity,  567,567;  shall  not 

VOL.   XIV, 


Clergy —  Continued. 

receive  a  clergyman  for  money 
paid,  567 ;  shall  not  act  for 
the  sake  of  filthy  lucre,  567  ; 
must  cease  from  selling  his 
patronage  or  be  deposed,  567, 
568 ;  are  ordained  by  two  or 
three  bishops,  594;  shall  not 
undertake  worldly  business, 
594,  597;  shall  celebrate 
Easter  before  the  vernal  equi- 
nox, 594 ;  must  partake  of  the 
offering  when  it  is  made,  594. 

Business,  in  how  far  allowable  to 
clergy,  269  seq. ;  or  forbidden 
to  the  clergy,  594. 

Canon,  clergy  are  bound  by  it,  59. 

Canonical  age  for  the  priesthood, 
84 ;  fixed  at  thirty  on  Christ's 
example,  84;  allowed  at  less 
on  plea  of  necessit}r,  84  ;  re- 
duced to  twenty-five,  84  ;  cen- 
sure, 273. 

Cantor.     [See  Singer.] 

Cathedral  chapter,  120. 

Celibacy,  excursus  on  clerical,  1, 
51  seq.  ;  its  early  practice,  11, 
93,  365  seq.;  fully  discussed  at 
Nicaea,  51  seq.;  Greek  view 
and  custom,  51  seq.,  83, 93, 129, 
366;  Latin  view  and  custom, 
51  seq.,  367  ;  fixed  in  the  west 
by  the  Trullan  synod,  52  ;  its 
transgression  by  a  priest,  how 
disciplined,  51  seq.,  79,  365 
seq. ;  East  and  West  aim  at  dif- 
ferent objects  in,  362, 365  seq., 
371 ;  objects  aimed  at  in  East 
and  West,  362,  365  seq.,  371, 
371,  372 ;  excursus  on  the  mar- 
riage of  the  clergy,  365  seq. ; 
views  of  Epiphanius  upon  celi- 
bacy, 366  seq.  ;  rule  of  Roman 
church  on,  371 ;  Latins  direct 
candidates  to  put  away  their 
wives,  371 ;  Eastern  church 
confirms  the  marriage  bond, 
371. 

Celibates  must  not  have  women, 
46,  52  ;  clergy  who  are,  46,  51, 
67,  79 ;  falling,  are  dealt  with 
as  Digamists,  71,  72. 

Chanters,  146.     [See  Singer.] 

Chartophylax,  his  duty,  35,  562  ; 
one  of  the  quasi  ecclesiastical 
dignitaries,  368  ;  had  charge  of 
the  Episcopium  at  Constantino- 
ple, 561,  562. 

Chorepiscopi,  excursus  on,  1, 
21  seq.  ;  confirmed  bishops 
from  the  Cathari,  20;  different 
theories  regarding  them,   21, 

22,  85, 113, 147  ;  their  history, 
21,  22,  113 ;  question  of  their 
being  true  bishops  or  presby- 
ters, 21,  85,  113,113,  147,158; 
duties  allowed  them,  21,  23, 
49,  68,  85,  113,  147,  158,  394; 
their  power  of  ordination,  21, 

23,  68,  113,  147,  158;  one 
ordination  of  a  presbyter  is 
recorded,  21 ;  confirmed  in 
country  and  villages,  21,  113 ; 

T  t 


Clergy —  Continued. 

consecrated  churches,  21 ;  were 
condemned  in  the  West  by 
papal  bulls,  22 ;  and  their  or- 
dinations annulled,  22  ;  all  fur- 
ther appointment  forbidden, 
22,  23,  158;  counted  parallel 
to  the  Seventy,  22, 85,  85 ;  some 
were  consecrated  by  a  single 
bishop,  22  ;  their  consecration 
by  three  bishops,  22 ;  were 
consecrated  for  villages  and 
the  country,  22,  23,  68,  113, 
158;  reappeared  in  the  West 
in  the  Middle  Ages,  23  ;  their 
election  and  duties,  49,  68, 
113;  must  have  bishop's  con- 
sent for  ordinations,  68,  113, 
158 ;  appear  to  have  had  liber- 
ty of  ordination  in  the  coun- 
try, 68  ;  can  offer  as  fellow- 
ministers,  85 ;  are  honored  in 
making  the  oblation,  85  ;  of 
good  report  may  give  letters 
pacifical,  112;  ordain  readers, 
subdeacons,  and  exorcists,  113, 
147 ;  may  be  deposed  for  ir- 
regularity, 113,  559;  are  ap- 
pointed by  the  bishop  of  the 
city  to  which  they  are  subject, 
113,  158;  classed  with  visit- 
ors, 158  ;  shall  not  be  ordained 
for  a  money  payment,  268, 
559;  may  ordain  the  reader 
in  a  monastery  with  the  bish- 
op's leave,  564;  exhorted  by 
St.  Basil  to  maintain  better 
discipline,  610. 

City,  erected  by  imperial  authority, 
shall  follow  the  political  juris- 
diction, 280,  383. 

Clergy,  not  to  be  hastily  advanced 
after  baptism,  10,  126;  to  be 
degraded  if  convicted  of  sen- 
sual sin,  10 ;  of  the  cathedral 
church,  12 ;  not  to  be  enrolled 
among  the  clergy  of  another 
parish  (diocese),  35,  275,  282, 
374,  562 ;  to  be  deposed  if 
convicted  of  usury,  38,  46, 
126,  597 ;  bound  by  canon 
and  decent  order,  39  ;  a  distinct 
hierarchy,  39,  140,  140,  394; 
forbidden  suretyship  and  wit- 
ness bearing,  47,  597 ;  not  to 
associate  with  Jews,  49,  370  ; 
their  clerical  ranks,  49,  140 ; 
their  marriage,  51  seq.,  79,  83, 
129,  362,  363,  363,  365,  594, 
595  ;  must  put  away  adulter- 
ous wife,  82,  83 ;  preside  in 
the  church,  108,  108 ;  appeal 
to  synod  from  "all  who  are 
enrolled  in  the  clergy  list," 
111;  are  under  the  bishop  and 
metropolitan,  112,  113;  must 
be  cognizant  of  the  bishop's 
administering  all  church  prop- 
erty, 120,  121 ;  if  accused  of 
dishonest  dealing,  they  shall 
appeal  to  the  synod,  121,  457; 
when  travelling,  may  be  aided 
from    church    funds   by  the 


642 


INDEX   OF  SUBJECTS 


Clergy —  Continued. 

bishop,  121;  their  children 
may  not  marry  heretics,  129, 
278  ;  may  not  carry  away  their 
portion  from  the  love  feast, 
148;  may  not  cast  a  reproach 
upon  their  ecclesiastical  order, 
148 ;  may  not  bathe  with 
women,  149,  399;  shall  not 
be  magicians,  enchanters, 
mathematicians  or  astrologers, 
151;  shall  not  make  amulets, 
151 ;  if  inliibited  by  Nestorius 
shall  be  restored  to  their  proper 
rank,  228 ;  those  who  are  or- 
thodox, must  avoid  apostate 
bishops,  228;  in  city  and 
country  must  not  submit  to 
Nestorian  bishops,  228 ;  de- 
posed clergy  can  have  no  help 
from  restoration  by  Nesto- 
rians,  230;  resisting  the  de- 
crees of  Ephesus  are  to  be  de- 
posed, 230 ;  teaching  contrary 
to  the  Nicene  faith  shall  be 
deposed,  231 ;  must  not  engage 
in  business  or  secular  manage- 
ment, 269,  562,  599;  may  be 
charged  by  the  bishop  with 
church  business,  269 ;  may  be 
called  on  by  the  law  to  care  for 
orphans,  etc.,  269  ;  in  how  far 
the  canon  can  be  lawfully  wid- 
ened, 269  seq. ;  forbidden  to  go 
from  city  to  city,  271,  272, 
275,  282,  562,  594;  shall  not 
be  ordained  at  large,  271 ;  or- 
dained in  public,  614;  one 
enrolled  among  the  clergy  shall 
not  accept  military  or  secular 
dignity,  272,  599 ;  one  so  ac- 
cepting and  not  repenting  shall 
be  anathematized,  272;  those 
of  poorhouses,  monasteries, 
and  martyries  are  under  the 
bishop,  273;  and  they  must 
not  cast  off  the  rule  of  their 
own  bishop,  273,  562 ;  or  they 
come  under  canonical  censure, 
273 ;  shall  not  go  to  secular 
court  against  a  clergyman, 
274 ;  shall  appeal  first  to  their 
own  bishop,  274;  or  lay  the 
case  before  a  third  party  with 
the  bishop's  consent,  274  ;  go- 
ing to  the  secular  court  are 
liable  to  canonical  penalties, 
274 ;  against  their  bishop  they 
appeal  to  the  synod  of  the  prov- 
ince, 274 ;  or  bishop  against  the 
metropolitan  shall  appeal  to  the 
exarch  of  the  diocese,  274 ; 
against  the  exarch  of  the  dio- 
cese shall  appeal  to  the  "patri- 
arch or  bishop  in  Constantino- 
ple, 274,  274,  275  ;  cannot  be 
enrolled  at  one  time  in  two 
churches,  275,  282,  374;  shall 
not  interfere  in  the  affairs  of  a 
former  church,  275,  282 ;  shall 
not  interfere  with  martyries, 
almshouses  or  hostels  of  an- 
other  church,    275 ;    for   dis- 


Clergy —  Continued. 

obedience  to  the  canon  they  are 
liable  to  degradation,  275, 
374;  if  wandering  they  shall 
be  returned  to  the  church  of 
their  ordination,  275,  282, 
374  ;  should  not  be  plural- 
ists,  275,  282,  565 ;  unknown 
and  without  letters  commenda- 
tory are  absolutely  prohibited 
to  officiate,  278 ;  any  conspir- 
ing against  their  bishops  are 
liable  to  deposition,  281,  381 ; 
against  their  fellow-clergy  are 
liable  to  deposition,  281,  381 ; 
those  who  are  driven  from  their 
own  country  may  be  received 
in  another,  282,  374 ;  who  are 
not  moved  of  necessity  are  not 
to  be  received,  282,  374,  374, 
562,  594;  but  are  to  be  re- 
turned to  their  own  church, 
282,  374,  374,  594 ;  shall  not 
seize  the  property  of  their  bish- 
op at  his  death,  283,  381 ;  such 
acts  are  forbidden  by  the  an- 
cient canons,  283;  some  go  to 
Constantinople  and  remain, 
raising  trouble,  283,  562  ;  but 
such  are  to  be  notified  by  the  ad- 
vocate to  depart  or  be  expelled, 
284  ;  they  go  "  to  the  imperial 
Constantinople "  for  their 
scheming,  283,  284,  562;  in 
digamy,  must  separate  before 
a  fixed  date,  362;  but  if  un- 
repentant, shall  be  canonically 
deposed,  362  ;  may  not  marry 
a  widow,  362  ;  may  not  marry 
after  ordination,  362,  367, 
595 ;  their  penances  for  un- 
canonical  marriage,  362,  363  ; 
list  of  persons  whom  they  may 
not  many,  363,  363,  377,  595  ; 
list  of  women  whom  they  can- 
not have  in  their  house,  364, 
567,  595 ;  deposed  if  they  per- 
sist in  having  women  who  are 
forbidden,  364,  595,  610;  ex- 
cursus on  the  marriage  of,  365 
seq. ;  difference  between  "mar- 
ried clergy  "  and  "  marriage  of 
clergy,"  365 seq., 368;  marriage 
of  clergy  always  forbidden, 
365  seq.  ;  King  Henry  VIII. 
on  clerical  marriage,  368 ; 
shall  not  keep  a  "  public 
house,"  369  ;  shall  not  enter  a 
tavern,  369 ;  shall  not  serve 
one  in  a  tavern,  369 ;  shall  not 
eat  the  unleavened  bread  of  the 
Jews,  370 ;  or  have  any  famil- 
iar intercourse  with  them,  370; 
or  summon  them  in  sickness, 
370 ;  or  receive  medicines 
from  them,  370  ;  or  bathe  with 
them,  370;  shall  keep  aloof 
from  the  Jews  on  pain  of  de- 
position, 370;  shall  not  put 
away  their  wives  on  pretence 
of  piety,  370,  379,  597 ;  in  the 
East  they  retain  their  wives, 
371,  379  ;  in  the  West  they  re- 


Clergy — Continued. 

nounce  them,  371;  any  or- 
dained earlier  than  prescribed 
ages  shall  be  deposed,  373; 
any  one  receiving  clergy  who 
have  no  letters  dimissory  is 
liable  to  deposition,  374 ;  must 
return  home  when  a  barbarian 
invasion  has  ceased,  374 ;  shall 
be  liable  to  deposition  if  he 
refuse  to  return  home,  374; 
when  deposed  become  as  lay- 
men, 375,  594;  but  on  re- 
penting their  crime  they  may 
be  restored,  375;  yet  if  unre- 
pentant, they  must  remain  as 
laymen,  375;  shall  not  take 
part  in  horse-races,  376,  388  ; 
or  assist  in  theatrical  represen- 
tations, 376,  376,  388  ;  they 
must  leave  the  marriage  when 
the  games  begin,  376  ;  or  if  one 
persist  in  remaining,  he  shall 
be  deposed,  376, 376  ;  punish- 
able for  acts  of  ignorance  as  to 
marriage,  377,  606  ;  to  be  pun- 
ished for  making  an  illegal 
marriage,  377,  606  ;  to  be  de- 
prived of  exercising  any  office 
of  the  ministry,  377,  606 ; 
shall  not  wear  unsuitable  dress 
either  at  home  or  travelling, 
377;  shall  wear  the  dress  as- 
signed to  them,  377 ;  shall 
obey  the  canon  or  be  cut  off 
for  one  week,  377 ;  shall  not 
baptize  or  celebrate  in  private 
oratory  without  the  bishop's 
leave,  379,  562;  if  they  dis- 
obey they  are  liable  to  deposi- 
tion, 379 ;  shall  not  be  or- 
dained because  they  are  of 
priestly  descent,  381 ;  shall  be 
ordained  as  they  are  examined 
and  found  worthy,  381  ;  shall 
have  charge  of  the  church 
property  on  the  bishop's  de- 
cease, 381,  382  ;  shall  have 
custody  of  the  deceased  bish- 
op's property,  381,382;  their 
good  standing  unprejudiced 
in  barbarian  disorders,  382, 
383  ;  shall  not  play  at  dice, 
under  penalties,  388;  forbid- 
den to  frequent  plays,  hunts 
and  theatrical  dances,  388, 
388  ;  have  received  the  gift  to 
teach  divine  things,  394;  an 
order  appointed  by  the  Lord 
and  having  their  offices,  394  ; 
if  absent  three  Sundays  from 
church  without  necessity,  400, 
426 ;  when  disciplined  by  their 
bishop  shall  not  find  refuge 
with  another,  427 ;  when  ex- 
communicated in  justly  should 
appeal  to  the  Metropolitan, 
428 ;  ought  to  be  respectful 
and  obedient  to  their  bishops, 
428  ;  some  flock  to  large  cities, 
but  must  be  sent  home,  430, 
562;  who  have  given  in  loan, 
letthem  receiveonly  their  own, 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


643 


Clergy —  Continued. 

450;  or  let  them  receive  as 
much,  450 ;  on  being  ordained 
should  be  admonished  to  ob- 
serve the  constitution,  450; 
shall  give  no  donation  to  a 
non-Catholic,  even  though  a 
blood  relation,  453 ;  those 
convicted  of  the  graver  crimes 
cannot  be  restored,  455 ;  shall 
not  carry  their  appeals  "  across 
the  water,"  456 ;  shall  appeal 
to  a  court  of  neighbouring 
bishops,  456,  502 ;  or  shall 
appeal  to  a  universal  council, 
456 ;  refusing  promotion  shall 
be  incapable  of  promotion, 
457 ;  if  out  of  poverty  he  be- 
comes rich,  he  must  hand  it 
over  to  the  church,  457  ;  un- 
less he  has  received  f  romfriend 
or  relative,  457 ;  shall  not  visit 
virgins  or  widows  without  the 
bishop's  or  presbyter's  leave, 
460;  and  should  not  visit  alone, 
but  with  some  grave  Christian, 
460 ;  those  condemned  by  their 
bishop  shall  not  be  justified 
by  any  one,  473;  must  ap- 
peal to  court  within  a  year,  or 
stand  condemned,  481 ;  those 
in  Africa  appeal  to  their 
own  African  church,  502 ; 
definition  of  what  persons 
cannot  accuse  the  clergy, 
504 ;  neither  excommunicated 
nor  slaves  nor  other  infamous 
persons,  504;  those  boasting 
against  their  poorer  brethren 
are  to  be  degraded  or  fined, 
559;  shall  not  be  received  with- 
out their  showing  a  license, 
562 ;  shall  not  be  received 
from  another  diocese  without 
letter  dimissory,  562  ;  shall  not 
take  to  secular  occupation, 
562,  565,  594 ;  may  devote 
themselves  to  teaching,  562; 
ought  not  to  be  set  over  two 
churches,  565  ;  yet  in  country 
places  a  dispensation  may  be 
granted,  565  ;  warned  earnest- 
ly against  the  running  after 
filthy  lucre,  565  ;  how  far  they 
may  turn  to  other  occupations, 
565,  565  ;  shall  not  affect  the 
wearing  of  costly  apparel,  566; 
shall  not  affect  the  anointing 
themselves  with  perfumes, 
566 ;  had  an  evil  example  set 
them  by  the  Iconoclasts,  566 ; 
shall  be  dressed  in  modest  and 
grave  clothing,  566  ;  ordained 
by  one  bishop,  594 ;  must  par- 
take of  the  offering  when  it  is 
made,  594 ;  or  else  give  a  rea- 
sonable excuse,  594;  joining 
in  prayer  with  a  deposed  cler- 
gyman as  a  clergyman  they 
shall  be  deposed,  594 ;  excom- 
municated, shall  not  be  re- 
ceived in  another  city,  594 ;  on 
pain  of  the  receiver  being  ex- 


Clergy —  Continued. 

communicated,  594 ;  or  of 
having  his  excommunication 
lengthened,  594;  the  excom- 
municated may  be  received  if 
they  bear  letters  commenda- 
tory, 594 ;  shall  not  leave 
their  parish  and  remain  in 
another,  594;  shall  not  leave 
their  parish  without  their  bish- 
op's leave,  594;  shall  not  be 
surety  for  any  one,  595 ;  he 
who  mutilates  himself  is  a 
self-murderer,  595  ;  of  those 
unmarried,  readers  and  singers 
alone  may  marry,  595  ;  of  the 
city  to  be  excommunicated  for 
the  people  not  receiving  their 
bishop,  596 ;  shall  not  insult 
their  bishop,  597 ;  shall  not 
mock  the  lame,  the  blind,  the 
deaf  or  one  infirm  in  his  legs, 
597 ;  any  one  reading  falsely 
inscribed  books  as  Scripture 
shall  be  deposed,  598  ;  if  any, 
through  fear,  deny  the  name 
of  Christ,  let  him  be  cast  out, 
598  ;  if  any  deny  the  name  of 
a  clergyman,  let  him  be  de- 
posed, 598  ;  but  if  he  repent, 
let  him  be  received  as  a  lay- 
man, 598 ;  shall  not  serve  in 
the  army  and  remain  in  the 
ministry,  599 ;  any  who  ran 
away  in  persecution  and  re- 
turned shall  not  perform  the 
office,  601 ;  those  guilty  of  for- 
nication are  not  as  married, 
604 ;  one  guilty  is  deposed  and 
not  excommunicated,  606 ; 
lapsed  shall  be  deposed,  607 ; 
disorders  among  clergy  under 
chorepiscopi,  610. 

Clerical  order,  148,  149;  priest- 
hood, clergymen,  laymen,  148; 
iepariKoi,  /cArjpiKOi  aovnjTai,  148, 
149. 

Clouds,  expellers  of,  shall  be  avoid- 
ed, 393. 

Confessors  are  sometimes  included 
among  the  clergy,  146. 

Continence  observed  by  the  clergy, 
371,  372. 

Copiatce,  called  clerici,  146,  147. 

Country  presbyters,  how  restricted 
in  the  city,  85.  [See  Chore- 
piscopi.] 

Courts  of  appeal  for  the  bishops 
and  clergy,  183,  274,  274,  275, 
280;  for  outlying  or  rural 
parishes,  280. 

Deacon  as  parallel  to  the  Levite, 
13,  14 ;  not  usually  ordained 
by  chorepiscopi,  21 ;  forbid- 
den to  pass  from  city  to  city, 
32,  109,  110,  271,  594;  must 
not  desert  his  own  church,  35, 
109, 110,  594 ;  ought  not  to  be 
received  by  another  church, 
35,  109,  110,  594;  the  disci- 
pline for  desertion  from  their 
own  church,  35,  109,  110, 
594 ;  must  not  lend  money  on 

t  t  2 


Clergy —  Continued. 

usury,  37,  369,  597  ;  forbid- 
den to  give  the  Eucharist  to 
the  presbyters,  38,  39  ;  cannot 
offer  the  Eucharist,  38,  39  ; 
forbidden  to  touch  the  Euchar- 
ist before  the  bishops,  38,  39  : 
must  remain  within  their  own 
bounds,  38,  39  ;  are  inferior  to 
presbyters,  38,  39,  46,  140, 
368;  should  not  sit  among  the 
presbyters,  38,  39,  140,  368; 
liable  to  deposition  for  disobe- 
dience, 38,  103,  110,  368; 
must  not  have  women,  46, 
364,  595  ;  must  honour  a  pres- 
byter, 46, 140 ;  if  he  put  away 
his  wife,  49,  364,  594;  disci- 
pline for  adultery,  50;  a  celi- 
bate, 51,  67,  444;  lapsed  and 
truly  returned,  63 ;  his  work 
and  office,  63,  108,  138,  139  ; 
his  penance,  63 ;  may  marry 
but  on  conditions,  67,363,  364, 
365  ;  his  lustful  purpose  pre- 
vented by  grace,  81,  81;  one 
polluted  in  the  lips  by  a  kiss, 
81 ;  one  in  carnal  sin  is  de- 
graded to  be  a  minister,  83 ; 
said  to  have  been  seven  in  num- 
ber, 86  ;  the  number  variable, 
86,  373  ;  the  number  of  seven 
is  based  on  a  mistake,  86  ;  car- 
dinal, 86  ;  must  observe  the 
Nicaean  Easter  on  pain  of  de- 
position, 108;  excommunicat- 
ed for  communicating  with 
excommunicated,  109 ;  if  de- 
posed he  cannot  officiate,  110, 
111 ;  how  to  be  disciplined  in 
acts  of  schism,  110,  111,  595; 
if  he  refuse  the  third  call,  he 
is  put  beyond  hope  of  restora- 
tion, 110,  111,  595  ;  has  right 
of  appeal  toLthe  synod  against 
his  bishop,  111,  118;  must 
accept  excommunication  until 
cleared  by  synod,  111,  595; 
not  to  be  received  by  others 
until  cleared  by  synod,  111, 
595 ;  forbidden  to  appeal  to 
the  emperor  without  the  bish- 
op's consent,  114;  forbidden 
to  sit  in  presence  of  a  presby- 
ter unless  invited,  140, 140  ;  is 
to  be  honoured  by  the  subdea- 
cons  and  lower  clergy,  140  ; 
stands  in  the  presence  of  bish- 
ops and  presbyters,  140,  368  ; 
had  distinctive  insignia,  142 ; 
ought  not  to  enter  a  tavern, 
144,  597 ;  shall  not  be  or- 
dained for  a  money  payment, 
268,  595 ;  a  simoniacal  ordi- 
nation is  invalid,  268,  595 ; 
should  not  be  ordained  at 
large,  271 ;  used  as  a  messen- 
ger, 304 ;  restrictions  on  mar- 
riage of,  362,  363,  365,  595; 
penances  for  uncanonical  mar- 
riage of,  362,  364 ;  deposed 
if  he  has  had  intercourse  with 
a  nun,  364 ;  some  hold  eccl§« 


644 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


Clergy —  Continued. 

siastical  offices,  368  ;  on  score 
of  office  some  presume  against 
the  presbyters,  368 ;  if  the 
representative  of  his  own  pa- 
triarch or  metropolitan,  he  is 
to  be  honoured,  368 ;  was  al- 
lowed by  early  Eastern  custom 
to  have  a  wife,  371,  371  ;  in 
the  West  he  must  separate 
from  his  wife,  371 ;  age  for 
ordination  of,  372,372,450; 
the  deacon  of  Acts  vi.  defined, 
373;  opinion  of  John  Chry- 
sostom,  373;  the  name  a  later 
introduction,  373;  one  ex- 
communicated by  his  bishop 
should  appeal  to  the  metro- 
politan, 428,  439,  507;  may 
be  tried  by  his  own  bishop 
or  by  neighbouring  bishops, 
442,  507  ;  shall  be  chaste  and 
continent,  444,  445,  454 ;  his 
appeal  to  a  court  of  three  dea- 
cons, 448,  452,  478;  if  ac- 
cused of  crime  he  appeal  to  a 
secular  court,  he  shall  lose  his 
office,  449;  he  may  not  be 
"conductor"  or  "procurat- 
or," 450;  if  accused  he  shall 
come  first  before  his  bishop 
and  three  deacons,  452 ;  if 
convicted  of  graver  crime, 
cannot  be  baptized  again,  or  re- 
ordained,  or  reconciled,  455; 
some  in  better  position  than 
the  priests,  457  ;  none  to  be  or- 
dained until  his  household  is 
all  Christian,  460;  stands  in 
the  council  or  synod,  486, 
490,  496,  504,  506 ;  shall  not 
be  ordained  for  money,  559; 
ordained  by  one  bishop,  594; 
shall  not  put  away  his  wife 
under  pretence  of  religion, 
594 ;  shall  not  undertake 
worldly  business,  594  ;  shall 
not  celebrate  Easter  before  the 
vernal  equinox,  594;  shall 
partake  of  the  offering  when  it 
is  made,  594;  or  else  give  a 
reasonable  excuse,  594 ;  the 
refusing  to  partake  may  excite 
suspicion  against  the  offerer, 
594;  shall  not  marry  twice 
after  ordination,  595 ;  guilty 
of  fornication,  perjury  or  theft 
shall  be  deposed,  595;  he  who 
strikes  anyone  shall  be  de- 
posed, 595  ;  if  justly  deposed, 
he  shall  not  meddle  with  the 
divine  offices,  595  ;  if  excom- 
municated, he  shall  not  be 
received  by  another  bishop, 
595  ;  foreign  deacon  shall  not 
be  received  without  letters 
commendatory,  596;  and  not 
even  then  without  further  close 
examination,  596;  though  re- 
jected by  the  people  after  his 
ordination,  he  shall  continue 
deacon,  696 ;  should  not  be 
addicted  to  dice  or  drinking, 


Clergy —  Continued. 

597 ;  he  who  has  joined  in 
prayer  with  heretics  shall  be 
excommunicated,  597;  but  if 
he  has  allowed  them  to  perform 
any  clerical  office  he  shall  be 
deposed,  597 ;  shall  not  ab-  j 
stain  from  flesh,  wine  or  mar- 
riage as  abhorring  them,  597 ; 
shall  observe  the  fasts,  unless 
hindered  by  infirmity,  598; 
shall  not  keep  fast  or  festival 
with  the  Jews,  598  ;  shall  not 
accept  from  them  unleavened 
bread  or  other  such,  598 ; 
shall  not  serve  in  the  army 
and  remain  in  the  ministry,  I 
599 ;  if  guilty  of  fornication 
shall  be  deposed,  not  excom- 
municated, 604;  if  polluted  in 
his  lips  he  shall  cease  from  his 
function,  608. 

Deaconess,  not  sharer  in  ordina- 
tion, 40, 130  ;  Paulianist,  to  be 
dealt  with  as  a  laic,  40 ;  was 
blessed  with  prayer  and  impo- 
sition of  hands,  40,  42  ;  excur- 
sus on,  41,  42,  130,  131  ;  prob- 
ably of  apostolic  origin,  41, 
130 ;  her  age  at  reception, 
41,  279,  372,  384,  606 ;  had 
a  vow  of  celibacy,  41,  279 ; 
her  duties.  11,  -50;  the  modern 
institution,  41  n.  ;  mother- 
house  at  Kaiserworth,  41  n. ; 
institution  in  ancient  church 
was  short-lived,  42,  130  ;  her 
election,  50;  sometimes  was 
president,  130  ;  an  Eastern  de- 
velopment, 146  ;  received  by 
laying  on  of  hands,  279 ;  re- 
ceived after  searching  exami- 
nation, 279 ;  her  age  not  under 
forty  years,  372,  384;  com- 
mitting lewdness  with  a  pagan, 
607 ;  shall  not  give  herself  in 
marriage  under  pain  of  anath- 
ema, 279,  365  ;  and  the  hus- 
band will  be  under  anathema, 
279. 

Defensor,  is  on  the  roll  of  the 
church,  268,  269  ;  African 
bishops  ask  leave  from  the 
Emperors  to  have  one  chosen, 
479,  491;  the  nature  of  his 
duties,  491,  492. 

Degradation  as  a  clerical  punish- 
ment, 275,  283. 

Deposition,  clerical,  10,  11,  23,  24, 
67  [see  Clergy,  Penalties] ; 
may  be  for  ordained  and  ir- 
regular ordainer,  11 ;  deprives 
of  "  the  external  honor  due  to 
God's  priesthood,"  108. 

Dignitaries,  quasi  ecclesiastical, 
list  of,  369. 

Dimissory  letters  for  the  clergy, 
35. 

Doorkeeper,  ought  not  to  enter  a 
tavern,  144 ;  history  of  his  of- 
fice, 144  seq.,  269  ;  official  of 
the  Roman  temple,  145  ;  some- 
times the  subdeacon,  152, 153. 


Clergy —  Continued. 

Doorkeeper  deposed  if  he  has  had 
intercourse  with  a  nun,  364. 

Dress  suitable  and  unsuitable  for 
the  clergy,  377. 

Economist,  ecclesiastical,  49  ;  fidel- 
ity required  in  the  church 
benefactions,  95  ;  shall  not  be 
advanced  for  money,  559  ;  has 
charge  of  the  church's  prop- 
erty, 614. 

Economus,  (Economus,  562  ;  one 
shall  be  in  each  church,  562, 
614;  must  be  had  in  churches 
and  monasteries,  562,  614. 

Elders,  probably  Metropolitans, 
446  ;  bishops,  presbyters,  447. 

Election  of  a  bishop,  how  carried 
out,  11,  11,  12,  118,  119,  119, 
120,  131,  465,  466 ;  interfered 
with  by  princes,  12  ;  to  be  done 
so  as  to  prevent  nepotism,  119, 
120  ;  that  of  St.  Augustine  of 
Hippo  considered,  120;  must 
not  be  by  tumult  and  violence, 
131  ;  people  excluded  from  all 
share  in,  131,  466  ;  the  ancient 
custom  was  probably  by  the 
people,  131,  466  ;  objections 
are  to  be  heard,  considered, 
and  decided  upon,  465,  466;  in 
a  disputed  election  two  bishops 
are  to  be  coopted  for  the  de- 
cision, 465,  466. 

Enthroning,  the,  of  a  bishop,  177. 

Eparchies,  the  Western,  17;  the 
Russian,  281. 

Eunuch,  his  relation  to  the  minis- 
try considered,  8 ;  self-mutila- 
tion always  condemned,  8,  595. 

Exarch  of  the  Diocese,  court  of  ap- 
peal, 274;  or  Patriarch,  274. 

Exarchs,  Qapxoi,  21. 

Executor  appointed  in  the  five 
provinces  of  the  African 
church,  491,  492,  502. 

Exorcist,  ordained  by  the  chore- 
piscopus,  21,  113,  147;  ought 
not  to  enter  a  tavern,  144; 
history  of  his  office,  144  seq., 
147,  148  ;  shall  not  be  or- 
dained, 146  ;  promoted  to  the 
office,  147, 147  ;  his  duty  in  the 
office,  185. 

Hegumenos,  head  of  a  monastery, 

563,  565  ;  shall  not  alienate 
parts  of  the  farm-lands  of  the 
monastery,  563  :  or  surrender 
them  to  anyone,  563;  shall 
not  appropriate  them  to  him- 
self, 563  ;  or  give  them  to  his 
poor  relations,  563 ;  or  use 
any  pretext  for  smuggling 
away  God's  property,  563 ; 
shall  not  give  away  on  the 
plea  that  the  land  is  unprofit- 
able, 563 ;  or  hand  it  over  to 
secular  powers  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood, 563 ;  shall  give  it, 
if  he  give  at  all,  to  clergymen 
and  husbandmen,  563  ;  may 
or  may  not  be  a    presbyter, 

564,  565 ;    shall    avoid   even 


INDEX   OP   SUBJECTS 


645 


Clergy —  Continued. 

the  appearance  of  evil  "with 
women,  567 ;  shall  not  receive 
a  monk  for  the  sake  of  money 
gift,  567;  shall  cease  from  the 
evil  practice  of  receiving  bribes 
or  be  deposed,  567,  568  ;  his 
consent  is -necessary  for  the  re- 
ception of  a  monk,  569. 

Hypo-deacon.     [See  Subdeacon.] 

Impediments  to  ordination,  23,  46, 
599.     [See  Ordination.] 

Intercessor,  guardian  of  the  spirit- 
ualities, 479  ;  a  bishop  shall  not 
hold  the  see  where  he  is  inter- 
cessor, 479 ;  a  bishop  shall  be 
provided  within  the  year,  479. 

Lector.     [See  Reader.] 

Magno  Sacello  Prsepositus,  369. 

Magnus  ceconomus,  369. 

Magnus  vasorum  custos,  369. 

Mansionarius,  perhaps  ostiarius, 
269. 

Meizoteroi,  their  office,  562,  562. 

Metropolis,  its  bishop  has  prece- 
dence in  rank,  112. 

Metropolitan,  has  to  ratify  the 
election  of  a  bishop,  11,  11, 
12,  15,  15,  112,  113,  131; 
want  of  his  consent  nullifies 
consecration,  15,  112,  420; 
every  metropolitan  has  his 
jurisdiction  confirmed,  15,  15, 

16,  112, 113  ;  his  rights  to  be 
preserved  in  due  dignity,  17, 

17,  112;  must  be  acknowl- 
edged by  every  bishop,  112, 
113  ;  has  to  take  thought  for 
the  whole  province,  112,  113; 
no  bishop  acts  in  anything 
unusual  without  his  consent, 
112,  113,  115;  does  not  act 
without  the  consent  of  others, 
112;  his  consent  required  for 
an  appeal  to  the  emperor, 
114;  may  invite  a  bishop  from 
another  province  to  ordain, 
115;    his    presence  makes  a 

full  synod,  116;  was  head  of 
his  own  province,  177 ;  was 
ordained  by  his  own  synod, 
177 ;  this  close  relation  was 
changed  by  canon  at  Chalce- 
don,  177 ;  one  forsaking  the 
ecumenical  synod  shall  be 
degraded,  225 ;  one  joining 
the  apostates  in  the  concilia- 
bulum  shall  be  degraded,  225 ; 
one  adopting  the  doctrines  of 
Celestius  shall  be  degraded, 
225;  all  the  ancient  and  cus- 
tomary rights  are  to  be  pre- 
served, 235,  267  ;  none  shall 
assume  jurisdiction  outside 
his  province,  235 ;  his  rights 
reserved  to  Nicomedia,  267 ; 
his  rights  reserved  to  Nice, 
267 ;  is  court  of  appeal  be- 
tween bishops  of  his  province, 
274;  has  appeal  to  his  own 
exarch  of  the  diocese,  274; 
against  the  exarch  appeals  to 
the  bishop  of  Constantinople, 


Clergy—  Continued. 

274;  only  one  can  be  in  a 
province  at  one  time,  276; 
two  have  been  in  the  same 
province  by  imperial  rescript, 
276,  277  ;  metropolitan  by 
imperial  rescript  shall  take 
the  bare  title,  277,  277;  case 
of  Photius  bishop  of  Tyre, 
277  ;  is  responsible  for  calling 
the  provincial  synod,  282 ; 
has  to  approve  the  place  for 
the  synod,  282,  369;  shall 
not  delay  episcopal  ordination 
longer  than  three  months, 
285 ;  unless  he  be  compelled 
by  inevitable  necessity,  285 ; 
by  delaying  he  is  exposed  to 
ecclesiastical  penalties,  285 ; 
shall  have  charge  of  the  prop- 
erty of  a  bishop  deceased, 
381 ;  shall  have  charge  of  the 
church  and  church  property 
in  a  vacancy,  381 ;  shall  not 
appropriate  the  private  prop- 
erty of  the  deceased,  381 ; 
shall  hand  the  church  property 
over  to  the  new  bishop,  381, 
382 ;  may  be  ordained  in  the 
absence  of  a  provincial  bishop, 
420,  421  ;  bishops  from  other 
provinces  invited  to  his  ordi- 
nation, 420,  421  ;  should  take 
charge  of  petitions  from  bish- 
ops to  the  court,  424 ;  with 
the  other  bishops,  takes  charge 
of  a  vacant  parish,  119  ;  in  his 
absence  appeals  are  made  to 
neighbouring  bishops,  428, 
429  ;  his  council  consists  of 
twelve  bishops,  452,  455, 
456  ;  is  in  Africa  called  pri- 
mate, 448,  461;  shall  not  take 
gifts  from  a  bishop  at  synod, 
560;  received  the  legal  synod- 
icum,  560 ;  shall  appoint  an 
oscouomus  in  his  church,  562; 
shall  do  nothing  without  the 
consent  of  all  his  bishops, 
596;  they  shall  all  aim  at 
unity  and  unanimity,  596. 

Minister,  lying  with  his  espoused, 
shall  be  disciplined,  608. 

Minor  orders,  83,  144, 144  seq. ;  who 
are  enrolled  in  the  "  clergy 
list,"  111,  144  seq.;  excursus 
on,  144-147  ;  their  forerunners 
found  in  the  Roman  temple 
its  officers  and  officials,  145. 

Monasteries  for  monks,  111  ;  have 
one  to  preside  over  them,  111; 
cannot  be  founded  without 
leave  of  the  bishop,  270,  270  ; 
must  be  provided  for  by  the 
bishop  of  the  city,  270,  270  ; 
how  they  became  exempt 
from  episcopal  control,  271  ; 
exempt  at  Monte  Cassino, 
Tours,  Fulda,  Battle  and  St. 
Alban's,  271  ;  the  clergy  must 
be  subject  to  the  bishop  of  the 
city,  273  ;  must  have  ozconomi, 
562,  563  ;  shall  not  be  robbed 


Clergy —  Continued. 

by  the  hegumenos,  563  ;  shall 
not,  on  any  pretext,  have  their 
lands  alienated,  563;  shall  not 
be  turned  into  public  houses, 
564;  the  hegumenos  may  or- 
dain a  reader  for  his  own  mon- 
astery, 564;  to  ordain  a  reader 
the  hegumenos  must  be  a 
presbyter,  564;  money  given 
to  them  as  dowry  for  children, 
567;  or  contributed  to  them  as 
a  gift  to  God,  shall  remain, 5 6 7; 
unless  there  be  a  complaint 
against  the  superior,  567 ; 
double,  are  forbidden  to  be 
erected,  568,  568  ;  the  double, 
have  become  an  offence  and 
cause  of  complaint,  568 ;  of 
men  shall  not  receive  women, 
568 ;  of  women  shall  not  re- 
ceive men,  568  ;  how  visitors 
shall  be  received,  568;  cases 
of  double  and  triple,  387,  388, 
568. 
Monasteries,  double,  387 ;  conse- 
crated by  the  bishop,  388. 
Monastic  life,  its  purity  and 
strength  guarded  by  canon, 
384. 
Monastic  vow,  as  an  impedimen- 
tum  dirigens  of  marriage,  386. 
Monk,  requires  bishop's  licence, 
46 ;  discipline  for,  48  ;  should 
have  a  distinctive  dress,  50, 
97  ;  how  to  be  disciplined,  111 ; 
how  coerced  when  rebellious, 
111  ;  must  not  engage  in  secu- 
lar business,  269 ;  may  be 
called  on  by  the  law  to  manage 
for  orphans,  etc. ,  269 ;  may  be 
called  on  by  the  bishop  to 
manage  church  business,  269 ; 
must  not  use  his  office  to  cause 
confusion,  270  ;  must  be  sub- 
ject to  his  bishop,  270, 270  seq. , 
273  ;  must  not  desert  his  mon- 
astery or  meddle  in  secular 
affairs,  270;  no  slave  without 
leave  can  become  a  monk, 
270 ;  the  true  and  sincere  is  to 
be  honoured,  270;  shall  not 
accept  military  or  secular 
dignity,  272  ;  one  so  accepting 
and  not  repenting  shall  be 
anathematized,  272 ;  monks 
in  religious  houses  are  subject 
to  the  city  bishop,  273  ;  monk 
casting  off  the  bishop's  rule 
is  liable  to  excommunication, 
273 ;  forbidden  to  marry,  280, 
386,  605  ;  unless  as  indulged 
by  his  bishop,  280;  question 
as  to  the  validity  or  invalidity 
of  a  monk's  marriage,  280 ; 
if  found  conspiring  against  his 
bishop  is  liable  to  deposition, 
281,  381 ;  or  against  a  fellow 
monk  is  liable  to  deposition, 
281,  381 ;  on  marriage  is  to 
be  excommunicated,  365,  386 ; 
shall  not  take  part  in  horse- 
races, 376;  or  assist  in  theat- 


G46 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


Clergy —  Continued. 

rical  representations,  376, 
569 ;  but  leave  the  marriage 
when  the  games  begin,  376 ; 
age  for  entering  the  order, 
384 ;  entrance  under  the  sanc- 
tion of  the  bishop,  384,  569 ; 
his  lengthened  probations  be- 
fore full  profession,  385 ;  con- 
victed of  fornication,  shall  be 
punished  as  fornicator,  386 ; 
marrying  a  wife  for  her 
company    is    as  a   fornicator, 

386,  606  ;  shall  not  go  outside 
the  monastery  without  leave, 

387,  569;  leave  to  be  had 
from  the  ruler  of  the  monas- 
tery, 387  ;  and  disobedience 
shall  meet  with  suitable  pun- 
ishments, 387  ;  shall  live  with- 
out offence  or  scandal,  387, 
569;  reserved  the  Holy  Com- 
munion for  his  own  use,  392 ; 
has  no  tonsure,  399 ;  should 
not  visit  virgins  or  widows 
without  the  bishop's  leave, 
460 ;  and  never  alone,  460 ; 
shall  not  be  taken  from  a 
foreign  monastery,  481 ;  for- 
eign monk  shall  not  be  made 
superior,  481  ;  or  ordained  to 
be  one  of  the  clergy,  481  ; 
how  the  monks  were  treated 
by  Copronymus,  540  ;  taught 
decorum  and  unselfishness  by 
the  seventh  ecumenical  coun- 
cil, 555  ;  none  shall  have  ac- 
cess to  a  nunnery,  568,  568 ; 
none  shall  eat  with  a  nun, 
568  ;  how  one  may  visit  a  nun, 
a  kinswoman,  568;  how  he 
may  bring  food  to  a  canoness, 
568 ;  he  shall  not  leave  and 
go  to  another  monastery,  569  ; 
in  another  monastery  he  will 
be  received  as  a  guest,  569 ; 
can  only  be  received  in  a  mon- 
astery with  the  consent  of  the 
hegumenos,  569 ;  his  life  is 
one  of  entire  self-surrender, 
569 ;  ought  to  avoid  the  soci- 
ety of  women,  569,  570;  may 
lodge  in  an  inn  if  travelling, 
570;  at  least  tacitly  he  pro- 
fesses celibacy,  605,  606. 

Neophite  is  not  ordainable,  126. 

Nuns,  the  distinctive  dress,  etc., 
50,  385;  protection  of  their 
purity,  364;  on  marriage  are 
to  be  excommunicated,  365  ; 
some  are  richly  dressed  before 
taking  their  vows,  386;  but 
this  is  strictly  forbidden  as  un- 
becoming, 386 ;  many  reasons 
against  this  vain  display,  386 ; 
may  shed  a  few  tears  at  admis- 
sion to  the  order,  387 ;  may 
not  leave  the  monastery  with- 
out leave,  387  ;  shall  not  leave 
without  a  companion,  387; 
leave  shall  be  had  from  the 
mother  superior,  387 ;  shall 
not  stop  outside,    387  ;  may 


Clergy —  Continued. 

only  go  outside  on  urgent  ne- 
cessity, 387 ;  and  disobedience 
shall  meet  with  suitable  pun- 
ishments, 387  ;  must  live  with- 
out offence  or  scandal,  387  ; 
chaplains  to,  569  ;  a  nun  ought 
not  to  leave  her  nunnery  and 
go  to  another,  569 ;  in  an- 
other she  shall  be  received  as 
a  guest  only,  569;  cannot  be 
received  without  the  consent 
of  the  superior,  569. 

Oratories,  Domestic,  270. 

Orders,  the  minor,  40,  113,  144, 
364  ;  some  in  them  preferred 
the  inferiority  and  marriage, 
457. 

Ordination,  is  not  to  be  hurried  on, 

10,  10,  11,  126,  154;  of  a 
bishop,  how  conditioned,   11, 

11,  12,  113,  117,  119,  365, 
465,  595 ;  distinguished  from 
election,  12,  118;  by  imposi- 
tion of  hands,  12  ;  by  chorepis- 
copi,  21,  22,  23  ;  must  be  pre- 
ceded by  examination,  23 ; 
bars  to  ordination,  23,  23,  24, 

46,  84,  363,  363,  365,  366, 
595,  599 ;  forms  of  irregularity 
in,  23,  24,  119,  376,429;  im- 
pediments named,  23,  24,  46, 

47,  84,  429,  595  ;  its  spiritual 
effect,  24,  83 ;  of  the  lapsed 
forbidden,  24;  in  ignorance 
how  dealt  with,  24,  24 ;  can- 
celled by  irregularity,  11,  35, 
119,  429;  to  be  repeated  on 
the  Paulianists,  40;  does  it 
give  absolution  of  previous 
sin  ?  83  ;  given  on  account  of 
zeal  and,  faith,  84  ;  given  for 
lack  of  men,  84;  cannot  be 
lightly  laid  aside,  116,  117  ;  as 
equivalent  term  for  election  of 
a  bishop,  118,  126,  127  ;  is  al- 
ways on  a  title  to  definite  work, 
152,  271;  simoniacal,  is  invalid, 
268,  376,  558;  ordination  of 
one  at  large  prevents  his  offi- 
ciating, 271  ;  ordination  at 
large,  illicit  and  invalid,  271, 
272  ;  ordination  at  large  causes 
suspension  of  function,  272  ; 
of  bishops  must  not  be  delayed 
beyond  three  months,  285; 
unless  delayed  by  inevitable 
necessity,  285 ;  by  examina- 
tion and  choice  of  life,  376, 
614;  shall  not  be  in  a  diocese 
without  the  bishop's  consent, 
429;  should  be  followed  by 
explanation  of  the  canons, 
451;  shall  not  be  repeated, 
464,  598 ;  of  a  bishop  shall 
be  by  at  least  three  other 
bishops,  11,12,  448,  465,465; 
after  a  proper  examination, 
556,  614 ;  by  at  least  three  of 
the  neighbouring  bishops,  557  ; 
was  sometimes  given  in  recog- 
nition of  benefits  to  the  church, 
559 ;   shall  be  repeated  after 


Clergy —  Continued. 

heretical  ordination,  which  is 
null,  598;  shall  not  be  given  for 
money,  268,  610,  615;  must 
be  in  the  face  of  the  public, 
614;  shall  not  be  held  in  the 
presence  of  hearers,  126;  pray- 
ers of  ordination  not  to  be  said 
aloud,  127  ;  after  the  people's 
being  asked  for  their  testimony, 
614;  after  careful  examination 
into  condition,  life,  etc.,  615. 

Ostiarius,  Trv\wp6s.  [See  Door- 
keeper.] 

Paramonarius,  a  clerical  official, 
269,  559;  shall  not  be  advanced 
for  money,  559.  [See  Pros- 
monaritjs.] 

Parvo  Sacello  Prsepositus,  369. 

Patriarch,  or  Exarch,  274 ;  has  ju- 
risdiction over  metropolitans, 
15,  16,  48,  274;  the  name 
later  than  metropolitan,  15,  16  ; 
absolves  in  unjust  discipline, 
46  ;  of  Alexandria,  his  juris- 
diction, 46;  of  Antioch,  his 
jurisdiction,  46 ;  of  Jerusalem, 
his  residence  and  honour,  47 ; 
of  Seleucia,  his  residence  and 
honour,  47 ;  of  Constantinople, 
his  pre-eminence  as  court  of 
appeal,  274,  274,  275 ;  four 
under  Rome,  48;  collection  for 
support  of,  48  ;  his  duties,  48. 

Patriarchate,  excursus  on  the  rise 
of  that  of  Jerusalem,  1, 18seq.; 
of  Csesarea,  17, 18 ;  that  of  Con- 
stantinople, the  highest  court 
of  appeal  for  the  clergy,  274; 
how  the  final  appeal  to  Con- 
stantinople was  restricted,  274, 
275  ;  the  ancient  order  defined 
by  name,  288. 

People's  place  in  episcopal  elec- 
tion, 12,  426  ;  have  no  share  in 
appointing  to  the  priesthood, 
131. 

Periodeutes.     [See  Visitors.] 

Physicians  of  the  soul,  158. 

Pluralities  forbidden  to  the  clergy, 
275,  282. 

Propositus  domus.  [See  Stew- 
ard.] 

Preaching,  the  duty  of  the  clergy, 
374;  especially  on  the  Lord's 
Day,  374 ;  from  the  Script- 
ures, 374;  according  to  the 
tradition  of  the  God-bearing 
fathers,  374 ;  following  in 
controversy  the  lights  and 
doctors  of  the  church,  374 ; 
not  to  be  a  glorying  in  one's 
own  composition,  374;  to 
give  the  people  the  knowledge 
of  the  good  and  desirable,  375  ; 
also  to  let  them  know  what 
is  useless  and  to  be  rejected, 
375;  to  lead  the  people  by 
knowledge  and  not  by  igno- 
rance, 375;  to  lead  them  to 
work  out  their  salvation  in 
fear  of  impending  punishment, 
375  ;  its  importance,  375  ;  its 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


647 


Clergy —  Continued. 

rule  in  the  English  Church, 
375. 

Presbyter  or  priest,  forbidden  to 
have  a  subintroducta,  11,46; 
can  only  have  mother,  sister, 
aunt,  or  such  as  is  beyond 
suspicion,  11,  46,  364,  567; 
forbidden  to  pass  from  city 
to  city,  32,  110,  271,  594; 
should  not  receive  the  Eucha- 
rist from  a  deacon,  38  ;  how 
distinguished  from  the  deacon, 
38;  superior  to  the  deacon, 
38,  368;  must  abide  within 
his  own  bounds,  39,  110 ;  con- 
celebrating,  39  ;  impediments 
to  his  ordination,  46,  595; 
must  not  discipline  in  anger, 
47;  his  ranking,  49;  lapsed 
but  truly  repentant,  63  ;  those 
who  pretended  to  be  forced, 
63 ;  should  not  be  a  recent 
convert,  10, 10 ;  should  be  de- 
graded if  convicted  of  sensual 
sin,  10,10,  79;  as  parallel  to 
the  Jewish  priest,  13,  14;  not 
usually  ordained  by  chorepis- 
copi,  21 ;  must  be  blameless 
at  ordination,  23 ;  must  not 
remove  from  his  own  church, 
35,  50, 110  ;  should  be  restored 
to  his  own  parish  (diocese), 
35,  110  ;  if  he  will  not  return 
to  his  parish  (diocese),  must 
be  excommunicated,  35.  110  ; 
must  not  force  himself  into 
orders,  46;  his  discipline  if  a 
bigamist,  47;  putting  away 
his  wife,  49,  51,  379,  594; 
a  celibate,  51,  444;  may 
not  embezzle  church  property, 
69 ;  on  marriage  he  is  deposed, 
79,  364,  365  ;  on  fornication 
or  adultery  be  is  expelled,  79 ; 
polluted  by  lustful  kiss,  81 ; 
may  retain  his  wife  after  ordi- 
nation, 93,  94,  364;  election 
to  his  office  is  not  to  be  com- 
mitted to  the  multitude,  131  ; 
question  of  popular  election, 
131 ;  in  barbarian  churches  is 
to  be  cared  for,  379 ;  granted 
a  liberty  in  putting  away  his 
wife,  yet  conditionally,  379 ; 
if  the  wife  is  put  away,  it 
must  be  by  entire  separation, 
379;  or  if  he  still  cohabits  he 
shall  be  deposed,  379 ;  the 
sacerdotal  functions,  63,  110; 
for  sin  before  ordination  he 
shall  not  make  the  oblation, 
83;  for  present  zeal  he  shall 
discharge  his  other  functions, 
83 ;  married  was  contemned 
by  the  Eustathians,  91,  93; 
married,  services  refused  by 
the  Eustathians,  91,  93  ;  must 
observe  the  Nicsean  Easter  on 
pain  of  deposition,  108;  ex- 
communicated for  communi- 
cating with  one  excommuni- 
cated, 109,  109,  447 ;  must  be 


Clergy —  Continued. 

disciplined  for  continued  ab- 
sence, 109,  110 ;  forbidden  to 
officiate,  if  a  wilful  absentee, 
109,  110 ;  forbidden  to  ex- 
ecute any  part  of  his  minis- 
try if  he  be  deposed,  110; 
cannot  be  restored  by  another 
synod  but  his  own,  110;  how 
disciplined  in  acts  of  schism, 
110 ;  refusing  the  bishop's 
third  call,  he  is  deposed,  not 
to  be  restored,  110,  111  ;  can 
appeal  to  synod  against  his 
bishop,  111,  118;  must  accept 
the  bishop's  ruling  until  the 
appeal  is  decided,  HI;  ex- 
communication continued  or 
relaxed  by  court  of  appeal, 
111 ;  country  presbyter  cannot 
give  canonical  letters,  112; 
he  can  send  them  to  the  neigh- 
bouring bishops  alone,  112 ; 
forbidden  to  appeal  to  the 
emperor  without  the  bishop's 
consent,  114;  had  distinctive 
insignia,  142  ;  ought  not  to 
enter  a  tavern,  144,  369,  461, 
597  ;  except  when  travelling, 
461 ;  must  not  bathe  with 
women,  149;  shall  not  be 
magician,  enchanter,  mathe- 
matician or  astrologer,  151; 
shall  not  make  amulets,  151 ; 
should  not  be  addicted  to  dice 
or  drinking,  597 ;  shall  not 
travel  but  at  the  bishop's  bid- 
ding, 152,  152  ;  shall  not 
travel  without  letters  canoni- 
cal, 152,  152;  must  not  wit- 
ness plays  at  weddings,  157; 
or  plays  at  banquets,  157  ; 
must  leave  wedding  or  banquet 
when  the  players  enter,  157; 
must  not  be  seated  in  the 
bema  before  the  entrance  of 
the  bishop,  157;  must  enter 
with  the  bishop,  if  the  bishop 
be  present,  157 ;  must  do 
nothing  without  the  bishop's 
consent,  158;  must  not  make 
the  oblation  in  a  private 
house,  158;  are  of  ten  accused 
in  order  to  stain  their  charac- 
ter, 183  ;  teaching  contrary  to 
the  Nicene  faith  they  shall 
be  deposed,  281 ;  shall  not  be 
ordained  for  a  money  pay- 
ment, 268,  595 ;  should  not 
be  ordained  at  large,  271  ; 
one  ordained  at  large  cannot 
officiate,  271 ;  restrictions  on 
marriage  of,  362,  364,  595 ; 
penance  for  uncanonical  mar- 
riages of,  362,  364,  606  ;  de- 
posed, if  he  has  had  inter- 
course with  a  nun,  364 ; 
deposed  if  he  receive  usury, 
and  does  not  desist,  369,  597  ; 
was  allowed  by  early  Eastern 
custom  to  have  his  wife,  371  ; 
this  liberty  was  allowed  to 
him  up  to  the  Trullan  Coun- 


Clergy—  Continued. 

cil,  371  ;  can  be  ordained 
although  living  with  his  law- 
ful wife,  371 ;  his  illegal  mar- 
riage deprives  him  of  the  work 
of  his  ministry,  377 ;  shall  be 
deposed  for  celebrating  with- 
out wine  and  water  mixed, 
380;  shall  not  accept  portions 
of  meat  in  the  church,  407 ; 
is  sufficient  for  a  village  or 
small  town,  420,  421  ;  when 
refused  communion  by  his 
own  bishop,  shall  not  find 
refuge  with  another,  427  ;  the 
law  of  his  appeal  for  justice, 
442;  should  be  chaste  and 
continent,  444,  445,  478; 
shall  not  make  the  chrism, 
446;  or  consecrate  virgins, 
446 ;  or  reconcile  any  one  in 
the  public  mass  (missa),  446 ; 
shall  not  give  viaticum  to  a 
dying  penitent  without  the 
bishop's  advice,  446 ;  shall  not 
make  a  schism,  447,  448 ; 
against  his  own  bishop  shall 
appeal  to  neighbouring  bishops, 
448,  507 ;  his  appeal  to  a 
court  of  six  presbyters,  448, 
452 ;  if  accused  of  crime,  he 
appeal  to  a  secular  court,  he 
shall  lose  his  office,  449 ;  if  it 
be  a  civil  suit  he  shall  also 
lose  his  office,  449 ;  he  may 
not  be  "  conductor  "  or  "  proc- 
urator," 450;  if  accused  he 
shall  come  first  before  his 
bishop  and  six  presbyters, 
452;  presbyter  convicted  of 
graver  crimes  cannot  be  re- 
ceived back  as  a  layman,  455  ; 
such  presbyter  cannot  be 
baptized  again,  or  ordained, 
or  treated  as  a  penitent,  455 ; 
shall  not  sell  his  church's 
goods  without  the  bishop's 
knowledge,  458;  or  usurp  the 
property  of  his  charge,  458 ; 
not  to  be  ordained  until  all  his 
household  is  Christian,  460; 
shall  make  the  Eucharist  fast- 
ing, 155,  378,  461,  464; 
should  not  neglect  the  chief 
cathedral  for  another  church 
in  the  diocese,  478 ;  should  not 
neglect  his  own  cathedral  for 
his  own  private  affairs,  478; 
shall  not  be  ordained  for 
money,  559;  ordained  by  one 
bishop,  594;  shall  not  put  away 
his  wife  under  pretence  of  re- 
ligion, 594;  shall  not  neglect 
worldly  business,  594;  shall 
not  celebrate  Easter  before  the 
vernal  equinox,  594;  shall 
partake  of  the  offering  when 
it  is  made,  594 ;  or  else  give  a 
reasonable  excuse,  594;  the 
refusing  to  partake  may  ex- 
cite suspicion  against  the  of- 
ferer, 594;  shall  not  leave  his 
parish   without   his   bishop's 


648 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


Clergy —  Continued. 

leave,  594;  guilty  of  fornica- 
tion, perjury  or  theft  shall  be 
deposed,  595;  who  strikes 
anyone  shall  be  deposed,  595  ; 
if  justly  deposed,  he  shall  not 
meddle  with  the  divine  offices, 
595;  if  excommunicated  he 
cannot  be  received  by  another 
bishop,  595  ;  no  foreign  pres- 
byter shall  be  received  with- 
out letter  commendatory,  596 ; 
and  not  until  further  close 
examination,  596 ;  though 
rejected  by  the  people,  he 
retains  his  rank,  596  ;  he  who 
has  prayed  with  heretics  shall 
be  excommunicated,  597  ;  but 
if  he  has  allowed  them  to  per- 
form any  clerical  office  he  shall 
be  deposed,  597  ;  he  who  has 
admitted  the  baptism  or  sacri- 
fice of  heretics  shall  be  de- 
posed, 597 ;  shall  not  re- 
baptize  one  already  baptized, 
597;  may  baptize  one  who  has 
been  polluted  by  the  ungodly, 
597 ;  shall  baptize  into  the 
Father,  the  Sou  and  the  Holy 
Ghost,  597  ;  shall  not  baptize 
into  other  names,  597  ;  shall 
baptize  with  three  immersions 
and  not  one  only,  597 ;  shall 
not  abstain  from  marriage, 
flesh  or  wine  as  abhorring 
them,  597 ;  shall  not  refuse  a 
repentant  sinner,  597 ;  shall 
not  refuse  flesh  and  wine  on 
festival  days,  597  ;  for  negli- 
gence or  idleness  shall  be 
excommunicated,  597 ;  shall 
supply  the  needs  of  any  of  the 
clergy  in  want,  598 ;  shall 
observe  the  fasts,  unless  hin- 
dered by  infirmity,  598  ;  shall 
not  serve  in  the  army  and  be 
in  the  ministry,  599;  polluted 
on  his  lips  he  shall  cease  from 
his  function,  608  ;  one  aged 
70  years  was  directed  to  send 
woman  away  and  enter  a  mon- 
astery, 610. 

Presbytidcs,  female  presidents,  129, 
130  ;  are  not  to  be  appointed  in 
the  church,  129,  130  ;  exposi- 
tion of  the  canon  upon,  130. 

Priest.     [See  Presbyter.] 

Priesthood,  is  an  established  order, 
564 ;  must  have  its  promotion 
carefully  guarded,  564 ;  is  af- 
fected by  tonsured  youth,  un- 
ordained  and  in  the  ambo, 
564;  alone  should  communi- 
cate at  the  altar,  136  ;  mem- 
bers of,  may  not  be  in  club  for 
drinking  entertainments,  157. 

Primate,  African  title  to  a  metro- 
politan, 448,  461  ;  every  prov- 
ince may  have  its  own,  450; 
one  for  Mauretania  Sitifen- 
sis,  450;  not  to  be  called 
prince  of  the  priests,  or  high 
priest,    or  other  such,    461 ; 


Clergy —  Continued. 

has  charge  of  calling  the 
synod  and  marking  absences, 
479. 

Primus  Defensor,  369. 

Prosmonarius,  is  on  the  roll  of  the 
church,  268 ;  may  be  guilty 
of  simony,  268 ;  perhaps  Pa- 
ramonarius  or  Mansionarius, 
269  ;  the  office  is  obscure,  269  ; 
perhaps  the  same  as  Paramon- 
arius,  269. 

Province,  with  its  metropolitan  and 
bishops,  11,  234,235;  its  synod 
administers  its  own  provincial 
affairs,  177 ;  its  synods  and 
courts  of  appeal,  183;  under 
the  jurisdiction  of  its  own 
metropolitan,  235 ;  has  been 
divided  by  secular  court,  276. 

Readers,  ordained  by  chorepisco- 
pi,  21,  113  ;  were  blessed  with 
prayer  and  laying  on  of  hands, 
4  ;  ought  not  to  enter  a  tavern, 
144;  where  first  mentioned, 
144, 146  ;  history  of  their  office, 
144  seq. ,  279  ;  without  letters 
commendatory  are  prohibited 
from  officiating,  278  ;  in  cer- 
tain provinces  were  allowed  to 
marry,  278,  364;  their  chil- 
dren, if  baptized  in  heresy, 
must  be  brought  into  commun- 
ion of  the  Catholic  church, 
278,  279  ;  they  may  not  give 
their  children  to  be  baptized  by 
a  heretic,  278  ;  or  give  them  in 
marriage  to  a  heretic,  278  ;  or 
to  a  Jew,  278 ;  or  to  a  heathen, 
278  ;  or  to  any  such  unless  on 
the  promise  of  such  coming 
over  to  the  orthodox  faith, 
278 ;  deposed  if  they  have  had 
intercourse  with  nuns,  364 ; 
may  marry  after  ordination, 
365,  595 ;  shall  not  be  ap- 
pointed on  the  score  of  cleri- 
cal descent,  381  ;  shall  be  ap- 
pointed as  they  are  examined 
and  found  worthy,  381  ;  re- 
ceive the  clerical  tonsure,  381, 
381 ;  at  puberty  should  be  mar- 
ried or  avowed  celibate,  450 ; 
shall  not  salute  people,  450 ; 
shall  not  be  advanced  in  an- 
other diocese,  485  ;  one  in  a 
monastery  may  be  ordained 
by  the  hegumeuos,  564  ;  they 
shall  not  be  given  to  dice  or 
drinking,  597  ;  shall  observe 
the  fasts,  unless  hindered  by 
infirmity,  598;  one  lying  with 
his  espoused  shall  be  disci- 
plined, 608. 

Religious,  forbidden  to  give  on 
usury,  46 ;  twice  a  year  meet 
the  bishop,  49. 

Secular  courts  are  forbidden  to  the 
bishop  and  clergy,  274,  276. 

Senate  of  presbyters  and  deacons, 
120. 

Singer,  made  by  the  chorepiscopus, 
113  ;  ought  not  to  enter  a  tav- 


Clergy —  Continued. 

ern,  144;  history  of  the  office, 
144  seq.,  279  ;  in  some  prov- 
inces he  is  allowed  to  marry, 
278,  364;  children  baptized 
in  heresy  he  must  bring  into 
the  communion  of  the  Catholic 
church,  278 ;  hereafter  the 
children  may  not  be  baptized 
among  heretics,  278  ;  or  given 
in  marriage  to  a  heretic,  278, 
279  ;  or  to  a  Jew,  278  ;  or  to  a 
heathen,  278  ;  or  to  any  such 
unless  on  the  promise  that 
such  would  come  over  to  the 
orthodox  faith,  278;  shall  not 
be  given  to  dice  or  drinking, 
597  ;  may  marry  after  ordina- 
tion, 365,  595 ;  shall  observe 
the  fasts,  unless  hindered  by 
infirmity,  598. 

Steward,  is  on  the  church's  roll, 
268 ;  economi,  aconomi,  268, 
562,  563 ;  may  be  punished 
for  simony,  268  ;  takes  charge 
of  the  church's  income  during 
a  vacancy,  285 ;  must  be  in 
every  church  where  there  is  a 
bishop,  285,  562,  563  ;  must 
be  one  of  the  church's  own 
clergy,  285 ;  manages  the 
church's  business  under  the 
bishop,  285,  562,  563;  must 
see  that  the  church's  goods  be 
not  squandered,  285 ;  must 
preserve  the  clergy  from  re- 
proach, 285 ;  history  of  the 
office  of  church's  steward,  285 
seq.,  562,  563 ;  his  accounts 
are  to  be  audited  by  the 
bishop,  286 ;  the  great  stew- 
ard of  St.  Sophia,  285,  286, 
563  ;  shall  be  appointed  in  his 
church  by  the  metropolitan, 
562 ;  or  by  the  bishop  of  the 
church,  562 ;  shall  be  ap- 
pointed in  monasteries,  563. 

Subdeacon,  may  be  ordained  and 
retain  his  wife,  371 ;  his  age 
at  ordination,  372,  372,  373; 
shall  not  be  given  to  dice  or 
drinking,  597 ;  must  not  wear 
the  orarmm  (stole),  140;  or 
leave  the  doors,  140 ;  not  even 
for  prayer,  142;  ought  not  to 
enter  a  tavern,  144;  history 
of  his  office,  144  seq. ;  must 
not  give  the  bread  or  bless  the 
cup,  147;  was  ordained  by 
chorepiscopi,  21,  113;  was 
blessed  with  prayer  and  laying 
on  of  hands,  40  ;  clerical  order, 
51,  83,  144  seq.;  celibate,  51  ; 
must  honour  the  deacons,  140 ; 
has  no  right  to  a  place  in  the 
Diaconicum,  140;  or  to  touch 
the  Lord's  vessels,  140,  455; 
restrictions  on  marriage  of, 
362,  364 ;  penances  for  unca- 
nonical  marriage  of,  362  ;  de- 
posed if  he  has  had  intercourse 
with  a  nun,  364  ;  may  be  mar- 
ried before  ordination,  364. 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


649 


Clergy —  Continued. 

Subintroductin  were  forbidden  to 
all  the  clergy,  11. 

Suspicion  or  scandal  against  the 
clergy,  46. 

Titles  to  ordination,  271,  272. 

Tonsure,  the  clerical,  given  to 
readers,  381 ;  the  ambo  was 
wrongly  used  by  tonsured 
youths  who  were  unordained, 
564. 

Trading,  as  allowed  or  forbidden 
to  the  clergy,  270. 

Translation  of  bishops,  priests, 
and  deacons  forbidden,  32, 
118,  464;  the  practice  not  un- 
known, 32 ;  examples  of,  32, 
33,  35,  464 ;  some  exceptional 
cases,  33 ;  excursus  on  the 
translation  of  bishops,  33  ;  rea- 
sons against,  33  ;  the  Nicene 
canon  against,  32  seq. ;  by  au- 
thority of  provincial  synod, 
33,  34 ;  with  consent  of  the 
pope,  33;  practice  traced  chron- 
ologically, 33  n. ;  object  and 
occasion  of  the  Nicene  canon, 
33,  34  ;  the  practice  in  differ- 
ent countries,  34;  different 
kinds,  34 ;  power  assumed  by 
the  secular  authority,  34,  35 ; 
by  authority  of  the  metropoli- 
tan and  Synod,  34  ;  common 
in  the  English  church,  35  ; 
restricted  in  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  church  in  America, 
35  n. 

Villages  and  country  districts  have 
visitors  in  place  of  bishops, 
158. 

Visitors,  in  place  of  bishops,  must 
be  placed  in  villages  and  coun- 
try districts,  158,  158  ;  were 
called  Periodeules,  158. 


Clinics,  on  recovery  after  baptism, 
must  learn  the  creed  by  heart, 
154;  and  receive  fuller  in- 
struction in  the  faith,  154; 
they  are  not  to  be  baptized 
again,  154 ;  and  are  not  to  be 
rashly  promoted  to  the  priest- 
hood, 154. 

Clubs,  for  drinking  must  not  be 
formed  by  clergy  or  laity, 
157;  called  Symbola,  comissa- 
lia,  commensalia,  comessalia, 
157. 

Code  of  canons  of  the  African 
Church,  441  seq.  [See  Car- 
thage, the  217.  Blessed 
Fathers.] 

Col.  ii.  18, 150. 

Columban  and  the  Easter  ques- 
tion, 56. 

Commemoration  of  the  dead,  461 ; 
if  in  the  afternoon,  it  can  only 
be  by  prayers,  461. 

Commination  service  of  the 
Church  of  England,  25. 

Commonitorium,  read  at  Carthage, 
441,  506,  507  ;  of  Theophilus 


bishop  of  Alexandria  to  Am- 
nion, 614. 
Communicants,  to  be   disciplined 
for    being    with    heretics    at 
cemeteries,  129;  with  the  peo- 
ple in  prayers  alone,  24,  64. 
Commitnicatio  idiomatum  was  de- 
nied by  Nestorians,  208,  209. 
Communion  of  the  Sick,  Excur- 
sus on.    [See  Eucharist.] 
Communion    letters.      [See   Com- 
mendatory Letters.] 
Communion,   repelling  from,  64; 

in  full,  64,  73,  74. 
Competentes,  catechumens  of  long 
standing,   31,  138  ;  how  they 
were  dismissed,  138. 
Compline,  its  origin,  134. 
Concelebrating,  its  meaning,  39. 
Conciliabulum,  was  held  after  the 
council  of  Ephesus,  226  seq., 
581  ;  consisted  of  John  bishop 
of  Antioch  and  the  discontents 
from  Ephesus,  227  ;  its  pecul- 
iarly   mixed    character,    228, 
579  ;  was  held  at  Constantino- 
ple, 584  ;  was  held  754,  a.d. 
584. 
Conciliabulum,  or  mock  council, 
541,   542,  543  seq.;  definitiou 
of  the  iconoclastic  conciliabu- 
lum, 542,  543  seq.  ;  its  anathe- 
mas, 545,  5"46  ;  account  of  its 
history,   546,  547  seq.;  its  ac- 
tion  and  decrees  reversed  by 
the  seventh  ecumenical  coun- 
cil, 548. 
Confession,    questions  upon,   27; 
its  value,  27,  125  ;  a  prelimi- 
nary to  restoration,  108,  125  ; 
to  make,  108  ;  accompanying 
penance  and  true  conversion, 
125,  129;  sacramental,  126. 
Confessors,  146. 
Confirmation,  as  administered  with 

chrism,  154,  446. 
Conjuration    or    pharmacy,     how 

penanced,  608. 
Conjurers  and  diviners,  how  disci- 
plined, 611. 
Consecration,    by    imposition    of 
hands,  12;  of  the  Eucharist. 
[See  Eucharist.] 
Consistentes,  a  class  of  penitents, 
26,  29,   31,   80 ;  their  position 
in  church,  26,  31. 
Conspiracy,  or  banding  together,  is 
a  crime  prohibited  by  all  law, 
281,  381  ;  specially  forbidden 
to  clergymen  and  monks,  281, 
381  ;  those  conspiring  against 
their  bishops  or  fellow  clergy 
shall  be  deposed,  281,  381. 
Constantine  I.,  emperor,  xxix,  8, 
28,  105,  536 ;  at  the  council  of 
Nicaea,  53,  108  ;  "  beloved  of 
God,"    108  ;  his    contest  with 
Licinius,    28;      convened  the 
Nicene  council,  53,    359 ;  his 
letter  on  the  Easter  question, 
54  ;  his  death,  413. 
Constantine  IV.,  Pogonatus,  em- 
peror,  328,  350,  353;  report 


made  to  him  by  the  Pros- 
phoneticus,  347  ;  confirmed 
the  synod  at  Constantinople, 
348,  353;  anathematized 
Honorius,  352,  353  ;  his  de- 
cree at  the  close  of  the  Synod, 
353. 

Constantine  V.,  Copronymus,  547  ; 
his  oppression  of  the  monks, 
and  the  church  generally,  546 
seq.  ;  sought  to  win  Pepin, 
548  ;  his  death  and  the  conse- 
quent reaction,  548  ;  was  a 
violent  iconoclast,  547  seq. 

Constantine  VI.,  emperor,  sum- 
moned the  seventh  ecumeni- 
cal council,  521  ;  his  divine 
Sacra  or  summons,  529,  530. 

Constantinople,  church  had  100 
deacons,  86  ;  its  metropolitan 
receives  wider  power  of  con- 
secrations, 177  ;  its  bishop  has 
prerogatives  of  honour  after 
the  bishop  of  Rome,  178, 177, 
287,  287  seq. ;  is  New  Rome, 
and  hence  privileged,  178, 178, 
287,  287  seq. ,  382 ;  had  a  Latin 
patriarchate  set  up  in,  179  ;  its 
bishop  or  patriarch  is  the 
highest  court  of  appeal  for 
clergy,  274  ;  its  metropolitan 
consecrates  to  Pontus,  Asia 
and  Thrace,  177  ;  its  patriarch 
or  bishop  receives  appeals  from 
exarchs,  274,  274 ;  its  see 
shall  have  equal  privileges 
with  the  see  of  Old  Rome, 
382  ;  in  ecclesiastical  matters 
shall  be  .second  after  it,  382, 
382  ;  its  privileges  confirmed 
at  Chalcedon,  287;  received 
at  Chalcedon  equal  privileges 
(foa.  TrpeaPua),  287;  the  rea- 
sons adduced  in  the  canon, 
287  ;  ranks  next  after  old  im- 
perial Rome,  287,  512  ;  its 
bishop  ordains  the  metropoli- 
tans of  the  Pontic,  Thracian 
and  Asian  dioceses,  287,  287 
seq.;  at  Chalcedon  council 
Constantinople  acquires  a  vast 
new  jurisdiction,  287  seq.;  the 
question  regarding  canon 
xxviii.  was  fully  discussed, 
292-5  ;  canons  of  the  council 
at,  held  under  Nectarius  and 
Theophilus,  410  ;  council  held 
under  Nectarius  394,  a.d.  511 
seq. 

Constantinople,  the  imperial,  283. 

Constantinople  I.  The  Second 
Ecumenical  Council,  381  a.d., 
161  seq.  ;  undisputed  general 
council,  162,  cf.  186, 187  ;  was 
not  convened  to  be  a  general 
council,  162  ;  was  a  local 
gathering  of  150  bishops,  162, 
170,  359 ;  had  no  connection 
with  the  Roman  bishop,  xiii, 
162,  186,  187;  was  wholly 
Eastern  and  had  no  Western 
representation,  xiii,  162,  170, 
186  ;  was  an  assembly  of  il- 


650 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


lustrious  saints,  162  ;  was  pre- 
sided over  by  Meletius,  bishop 
of  Antioch,  not  in  union  with 
Rome,  162 ;  its  second  presi- 
dent was  Gregory  of  Nazien- 
zen,     doubtfully     translated, 

162  ;  its  action  continued  the 
Meletian  schism,  162,  162  ; 
canons  were  not  in  their  natu- 
ral position  at  Chalcedon,  162, 
171,  186,  187  ;  its  creed  was 
notreferred  to  at  Ephesus,  fifty 
years  afterwards,  162,  187  ;  its 
title  to  ecumenicity  rests  upon 
its  creed,  162,  186,  187  ;  it  is 
disputed  if  it  ever  set  forth  a 
creed,  162 ;  theories  regarding 
the  origin  of  the  creed,  162  n., 

163  ;  excursus  on  the  Fili- 
oque  clause,  165  seq. ;  texts  of 
the  creed,  163,  164  ;  added  to 
the  Nicene  creed,  166  ;  had  its 
creed  added  to,  at  Chalcedon, 
166;  decisions  were  confirmed 
by  the  III.  council  of  Toledo, 
167  ;  explanation  suggested  for 
its  being  added  to,  168 ;  his- 
torical note  on  its  lost  tome, 
169,  189;  account  of  its  Sy- 
nodical  letter  to  Pope  Dama- 
sus,  169 ;  dealt  with  Apolli- 
narianism,  169  ;  reassembled, 
382,  a.d.  169  ;  was  at  first  con- 
vened by  Theodosius  I.,  the 
Emperor,  161,  170,  172,  359; 
text  of  the  council's  report  to 
Theodosius,  1 70  ;  ratified  the 
faith  of  the  Nicene  fathers, 
170;  anathematized  heresies, 
170;  asked  Theodosius's  rati- 
fication of  their  canons,  170; 
on  the  number  of  its  canons, 
probably  four,  171 ;  text  of  the 
seven  canons,  172-86 ;  its 
date,  161,  172,  272  n.  ;  its  com- 
position, 163,  172;  warning 
to  the  reader  on  Canon  VII., 
184 ;  had  disputes  at  its  close, 
186  ;  was  followed  by  a  synod 
next  year,  382  a.d.,  186;  had 
its  creed  received,  but  its  can- 
ons questioned,  186 ;  Latin  in- 
fluence was  against  the  coun- 
cil, 186;  Rome  long  resented 
the  third  canon,  187,  287  seq. ; 
its  faith  confirmed  by  the 
Quinisext  council,  359 ;  its 
canons  confirmed  by  the 
Quinisext  council,  361  ;  its  re- 
lations to  the  Roman  See,  xiii. 

Constantinople.  The  Supplemental 
Council,  382,  a.d.  181,  182, 
183,  186  seq.  ;  excursus  on  its 
authority,  186,  187  ;  the  sy- 
nodical  letter  to  the  bishops  in 
Rome,  188  seq. 

Constantinople  II.  The  Fifth  Ecu- 
menical Council,  553,  a.d. 
597  seq.  ;  called  by  Justinian 
I.,  299,  360;  without  the  as- 
sent of  Pope  Vigilius,  xiii, 
299 ;  was  opened  on  5th  May, 
553,   a.d.,  299  ;  followed  the 


order  of  preceding  councils, 
299,  307 ;  excursus  on  the 
genuineness  of  the  Acts,  301  ; 
Justinian's  letter  to  the  fath- 
ers of  the  Council,  302  seq.  ; 
agreed  with  Justinian's  order 
to  erase  Vigilius's  name  from 
the  diptychs,  305  ;  sentence  of 
the  synod,  306-11 ;  confirmed 
the  preceding  four  general 
councils,  307,  310,  314;  its 
confession  of  faith  and  its 
standards  of  truth,  310;  con- 
demned Theodore,  Theodoret, 
the  letter  attributed  to  Ibas, 
and  the  Three  Chapters,  310- 
311,  317,  360;  capitula  of 
the  council,  312  seq. ;  con- 
fessed the  one  hypostasis  in 
Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  312, 
313;  anathematized  Alius, 
Eunomius,  Macedonius,  Apol- 
liuaris,  Nestorius,  Eutyches 
and  Origen,  314,  360;  Har- 
nack's  account  of  its  work, 
317  ;  confirmed  by  Pope  Vigi- 
lius, 321  seq.  ;  confirmed  by 
Pope  Pelagius  I.,  323  ;  not 
well  received  at  first  in  the 
West,  Asia  and  Africa,  323  ; 
at  last  was  accepted  and  recog- 
nized, 323  ;  recognized  by  the 
sixth  general  council  in  680, 
a.d.  323;  its  faith  confirmed 
by  the  quinisext  council,  360  ; 
its  relation  to  the  Roman  see, 
xiv. 

Constantinople  III.  The  Sixth 
Ecumenical  Council,  680-681 
a.d.,  325  seq. ;  historical  intro- 
duction, 326  ;  its  meeting  and 
attendance,  326 ;  summoned 
by  Emperor  Constantine  Po- 
gonatus,  326,  345,  353  ;  pre- 
sided over  by  the  emperor, 
326  ;  had  the  five  patriarchs 
represented,  326 ;  held  in 
TruUo  and  so  named,  326, 
344;  all  the  patriarchs  were 
cited  by  Sacras  sent  to  them, 
326  ;  the  sentence  against  the 
Monothelites,  342,  353;  the 
definition  of  faith  of  the  coun- 
cil, 344  seq. ;  confirmed  the 
preceding  synods,  344,  345  ; 
reasserted  the  creeds  of  ear- 
lier synods,  344,  353 ;  the 
Prosphoneticus  to  the  empe- 
ror, 347  seq.  ;  letter  of  the 
Council  to  S.  Agatho,  349  seq.; 
Imperial  edict  posted  at  the 
great  church,  353  ;  its  canons 
as  issued  by  the  Trullan  or 
Quinisext,  357  seq.  ;  its  faith 
confirmed  by  the  Trullan  or 
Quinisext,  360;  the  degrees 
neither  add  nor  take  away 
from  the  faith,  360;  its  rela- 
tion to  the  Roman  see,  xiv. 

Constantinople  IV.  The  Quini- 
sext or  Council  in  Trullo, 
692,  a.d.,  355  seq.;  not  truly 
ecumenical,  as  the  West  was 


unrepresented,  356,  358 ;  ab- 
jured by  the  Pope,  356  ;  sup- 
plementary to  the  two  councils 
preceding,  356,  357,  358  ;  con- 
voked by  Justinian  II.,  356, 
357  ;  attended  by  four  patri- 
archs, 356,  357  ;  its  names  and 
place  of  meeting,  356  ;  its  pur- 
pose, to  form  a  body  of  dis- 
ciplinary canons,  356,  358, 
362;  its  date  doubtful,  356, 
357,  540  n. ;  the  signatures  to 
the  decrees  and  canons,  357 ; 
the  authority  of  its  canons,  as 
belonging  to  the  sixth  council, 
367  seq.,  540;  the  character  of 
the  canons,  358 ;  the  canons 
CIL,  359  seq.;  confirms  the 
faith  of  the  six  preceding  holy 
synods,  359;  confirms  the 
canons  of  the  ecumenical  and 
other  councils,  361 ;  confirms 
decretal  letters  of  certain  the- 
ologians, 361;  the  Emperor's 
object  in  convening  the  coun- 
cil, 362 ;  calls  itself  "this  holy 
andecumenicalcouncil,"  362; 
its  object  in  the  canons,  362  ; 
some  canons  renewed  some  of 
the  apostolic  canons,  363 ;  dealt 
with  the  apostolic  canons  as 
having  fixed  the  discipline, 
466 ;  the  tone  of  the  canons  is 
opposed  to  the  West,  370,  379  ; 
the  desire  of  the  council  is  for 
the  good  of  the  flock,  370;  no 
desire  to  abolish  apostolic 
authority,  370 ;  accepted  the 
African  code,  394. 

Constantinople  V.  The  so-called 
Eighth  Ecumenical  Council, 
869,  a.d.  589  seq.;  East  and 
West  considered  it  ecumeni- 
cal, 586  ;  was  opposed  to  Pho- 
tius,  586  ;  another  met  at  Con- 
stantinople, 879  A.D.,  587; 
under  the  auspices  of  Photius, 
587  ;  was  accepted  in  the  East 
as  the  Eighth  Ecumenical, 
587 ;  both  councils  acknowl- 
edged the  Seventh,  587. 

Constantinople,  Council  held  un- 
der Nectarius394A.D.,  511  seq. ; 
introductory  note,  512  ;  act  of 
convening,  513  ;  case  of  the 
bishopric  of  Bostra  considered 
and  decided,  513. 

Consubstantial  or  Homousios,  4  n. 

Continence,  accompanied  by  godli- 
ness and  gravity,  101  ;  to  be 
observed  by  bishops,  priests, 
and  deacons,  444,  445,  454; 
to  be  observed  before  and  after 
eucharist,  445,  454;  all  clergy, 
including  subdeacons,  should 
practice,  454;  left  to  the  dis- 
cretion of  the  aged,  599;  in 
connection  with  nocturnal  pol- 
lutions, 600,  602. 

Contrary  to  ecclesiastical  canon, 
10. 

Conventicles  and  their  services  for- 
bidden, 94. 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


651 


Converts  from  heathenism  must 
have  time  for  instruction,  10, 
10. 

Copiatse.     [See  Clergy.] 

1  Cor.  i.  17,  375  ;  ii.  9,  136  ;  vi.  1,  2, 

472  ;  vii.  38,  9 ;  viii.  4,  553  ; 
xi.  10,  99  ;  xi.  20,  461 ;  xiv.  34, 
397. 

2  Cor.  iii.  1,  112,  453. 

Corn,  ears  of,  may  be  offered  on 

the  altar,  594. 
Co-standers,  their  place,  602. 


COUNCILS. 

African,  254  a. d.,  63. 
Agde,  506a.d.,  270,385. 
Aix-la-Chapelle  I.,  809  a.d.  ,  156. 
Aix-la-Chapelle  II.,  816  a.d.,  38. 
Alexandria,  320  a.d.  ,  208. 
Alexandria,  362  a.d.,  173. 
Ancyra,  314  a.d.,  21,  23,  29,  59, 

73,  74,  125,  158,  268,  361,  364, 

365,  386,  404. 
Antioch,    269  a.d.,  9,  22,  33,  59, 

146,  148,  361,  383. 
Antioch,  341  a.d.,  21,  59,  60,  144, 

147,  158,  163,  178,  189,  268, 
282,  383,  416,  428,  453,  456, 
465. 

Aries,  314  a. d.,  36,  40. 
Aries,  353  a.d.,  8. 
Braga,  561  a.d.,  142,  143. 
Calcuth,  787  a.d.,  576. 
Carthage,  257  a.d.,  362. 
Carthage,  345  or  348  a.d.,  445. 
Carthage,  348  a.d.,  37,  361. 
Carthage,  387  or  390  a.d.,    444, 

446,  447,  448. 
Carthage,  394  a.d.,  459. 
Carthage,  397  a.d.,  33,  449,  459, 

464,  466,  467,  468,  469,  470, 

472. 
Carthage,  398  a.d.,  33,  127. 
Carthage,  399  a.d.,  472. 
Carthage,  400  a.d.,  372. 
Carthage,  401  a.d.  ,  455,  472,  473, 

474,  478,  481,  482,  483. 
Carthage,  403  a.d.,  387. 
Carthage,  405  a.d.,  490. 
Carthage,  407  a.d.,  490,  491,  493, 

494. 
Carthage,  418  a.d.,  456,  497,  498, 

499,  500,  501,  502,  503. 
Carthage,    419    a.d.,   36,   37,   44, 

151,  361,  369,  504. 
Carthage,  421  a.d.,  458. 
Carthage,  525  a.d.,  475. 
Chalcedon,  451  a.d.,  365,  368,  373, 

375,  381,  382,  386,  388,  453, 

468,  479,  563,  567. 
Chalons,  813,  a.d.,  38. 
Clovesho,  747  a.d.,  270. 
Constantinople,  381  a.d.,   16,   59, 

86,  124, 161seq.,167,  186  seq., 

302,  382. 
Constantinople,  382  a.d.,  181,  182, 

183,  405. 
Constantinople,  394  a.d.,  362. 
Constantinople,  448  a.d.,  275. 
Constantinople  (Home  Synod),  543 

A.D.,  317. 


Councils —  Continued. 
Constantinople,  553  a.d.,  200,  234, 

263,  401. 
Constantinople,  680  a.d.,  234,  348, 

369. 
Constantinople,  869  a.d.,  xv. 
Constantinople,  879  a.d.,  xv. 
Douzy,  871  a.d.,  23. 
Elvira,  305  a.d.,  36,  51,  73,  145. 
Epaon,  517  a.d.,  130. 
Ephesus,  431  a.d.,  3,  13,  18, 19,  23, 

59,  167, 187,  200,  201,  286,  302. 
Ephesus  (Latrocinium),  449  a.d., 

186,  187,  233. 
Florence,    1438-1439  a.d.,  x,  166, 

167,  290,  587. 
Florence,  1439  a.d.,  181,  232,  233. 
Florentine  Union,  1439  a.d.,  179. 
Frankfort,  794  a.d.,  385,  404,  539, 

577,  578. 
Gangra,  358  a.d.,  51,  52,  59,  268, 

286,  361,  447. 
Gentilly,  767  a.d.,  548. 
Hertford,  673  a.d.,  271,  385. 
Hippo,  393  A.D.,  401,  449,  450,  451, 

452, 453,  454, 459,  460, 461,  463, 

466,  467,  479,  503. 
Iconium,  235  a.d.,  128. 
Langres,  830  a.d.,  23. 
Laodicea,  341  a.d.,  9, 112, 146, 148, 

150,  361,  369,  377,  378,    399, 

405. 
Laodicea,  343  a.d.,  xv,  34,60, 158, 

177,  181,   182,   184,  272,  274, 

361,  370,  453. 
Laodicea,  363  a.d.,  144,  279. 
Lyons,  886  a.d.,  23. 
Lyons,  1274  a.d.  ,  xv,  287. 
Mayence,  813  a.d.,  38. 
Mayence,  847  a.d.,  23. 
Meaux,  845  a.d.,  29. 
Metz,  888  a.d.,  22. 
Milan,  345  a.d.,  414. 
Neocsesarea,  314  a.d.,  21,22,  23, 24, 

32,  59,  125,  268,  361,  365,  368, 

373 
Nice  I.,"  325  a.d.,  1,  2,  3,  4,  9,  23, 

32  seq.,  36,  59,  112,  125,  140, 

167,  186,  282,   302,  344,  364, 

368,  403,  428. 
Nice  II.,  787  a.d.,  127,  128,  166, 

352,  590,  612. 
Orange,  441  a.d.,  42,  130,  363. 
Orange,  529  a.d.,  42. 
Orleans,  511  a.d.,  270,  385. 
Orleans,  533  a.d.,  130. 
Orleans,  538  a.d.,  38. 
Paris,  829  a.d..,  22,  271. 
Paris,  Convention  of,  825  a.d.,  577. 
Philippopolis,  347  a.d.,  414. 
Pontion,  876  a.d.,  23. 
Quinisext,   692  a.d.,  xv,    60,   86, 

124, 153,  155, 156, 185,  375  seq. 
Ratisbon,  800  a.d.,  22. 
Rheiins,  813  a.d.,  38,  422. 
Riez,  439  a.d.,  21. 
Rimini,  359  a.d.,  172,  173. 
Rome,  369  a.d.,  182. 
Rome,  380  a.d.,  182. 
Rome,  649  a.d.,  209. 
Rome,  745  a.d.,  150. 
Rome,  1139  a.d.,  367. 
Rome,  1215  a.d.,  179,  290. 


Councils — Continued. 

Sardica,  343  a.d.,  xv,  34,  44,  55, 
60, 115,  124, 158,  177,  181, 182, 
184,  272,  274,  361,  370,  453. 

Seleucia,  359  a.d.,  173. 

Spanish  II.,  619  a.d.,  22. 

Toledo,  400  a.d.,  166. 

Toledo,  535  a.d. ,  373. 

Toledo,  589  a.d.,  166,  167,  168. 

Toledo,  633  a.d.,  142,  143,  271. 

Toledo,  646  a.d.,  385. 

Toledo,  653  A.D.,  166. 

Toledo,  681  a.d.,  166. 

Toledo,  694  a.d.,  363. 

Tours,  675  a.d.,  31,  36. 

Trent,  1545-1563  a.d.,  10,  92,  157, 
591. 

Trullan,  in  Trullo,  or  Quinisext, 
692  A.D.,  xv,  38,  60,  86  112, 
124, 127, 130, 148, 149, 153, 155, 
156,  157,  185,  268,  279,  288, 
355  seq.,  382,  560,  570,  590, 
612  n. 

Vannes,  c.  465  a.d.,  385. 

Vienna,  1316  a.d.,  xxxv. 


Council  (Ecumenical)  disliked  by 
Gregory  Nazianzen,  13  ;  tests 
writings  on  the  faith,  and  ap- 
proves or  condemns,  299  seq. ; 
ecumenicity  of  a  council  con- 
sidered, 524  seq.  ;  question 
over  the  second  Nicene,  524 
seq.  ;  the  four  were  revered  by 
Gregory  Great,  525 ;  the  six 
Ecumenical  were  confirmed 
and  adopted,  555,  555,  556. 

Council  (Provincial)  held  twice  a 
year,  46. 

Courts  of  Appeal.    [See  Clergy.] 

Creed,  the  Nicene,  1,  3,  249,  263  ; 
of  Eusebius,  1,  3 ;  to  be  learned 
by  the  catechumens  and  re- 
peated to  the  bishop,  154, 
399  j  or  to  be  repeated  to  the 
presbyters,  154;  to  be  re- 
peated by  the  catechumens  on 
the  Thursday  before  baptism, 
154,  154  ;  of  Constantinople, 
difficulties  about  the,  162, 
162  n.,  163,  167,  168;  text  of 
that  of  Constantinople,  163, 
263  ;  text  of  those  in  Epipha- 
nius's  Ancoratus,  164,  165  ;  ad- 
ditions to,  were  forbidden, 
162,  163,  167-9  ;  that  of 
Ephesus,  197;  in  Cyril's  letter 
to  Nestorius,  202 ;  those  of 
Constantinople  and  Niccea 
are  one  creed,  234  ;  that  given 
out  by  the  seventh  ecumeni- 
cal, Nictea  II. ,  540,  549. 

Cresconius  bishop  of  Villa  Regis, 
464,  480 ;  left  his  see  and 
invaded  Tubinia,  464;  re- 
fused to  leave  and  return  to 
his  own  church,  464;  was 
deposed  for  contempt  and 
handed  over  to  the  magistrate, 
454,  480. 

Crime  should  not  be  punished 
twice,  604. 


652 


INDEX   OF  SUBJECTS 


Criminal  or  criminous  person 
may  not  accuse  a  bishop,  446. 

Cross  should  receive  all  due  honour 
as  the  sign  of  salvation,  398, 
401  ;  its  figure  shall  not  be 
placed  on  the  pavement,  398  ; 
should  not  be  desecrated  by 
the  tread  of  feet,  398  ;  how  it 
is  to  be  venerated,  398,  401  ; 
the  act  of  signing  with,  610. 

Customs  as  guide  and  law,  ancient, 
15,  17,  234;  followed  in  the 
canons,  383. 

Cylestras,  its  meaning  doubtful, 
397,  397. 

Cyprian,  bishop  of  Carthage,  517  ; 
presided  over  council,  257 
A.d.,  516,  517,  518;  opposed  to 
heretical  baptism,  517;  ques- 
tion of  his  relation  to  the  see 
of  Rome  at  his  death,  518  ; 
his  letter  against  heretical 
baptism,  518  seq. 

Cyprus,  its  archbishop  subject  to 
Antioch,  47,  234,  235,  235; 
privileges  belonging  to  him, 
177,  235 ;  the  question  of 
jurisdiction  is  referred  to  at 
Ephesus,  235  ;  ordinations  are 
reserved  to  the  bishops  of 
Cyprus,  235,  235. 

Cyriacus  was  forced  to  take  an  oath 
at  ordination,  605  ;  the  conse- 
quences of  the  oath,  605. 

Cyril  of  Alexandria,  his  doctrine 
condemned,  2  n.  ;  sends  Ni- 
cene  canons,  44 ;  in  the  Easter  | 
question,  56  ;  reports  to  Celes- 
tine  upon  Nestorius's  teach- 
ing, 192 ;  text  of  his  letter 
to  Nestorius,  197,  198,  199, 
201  seq.,  250;  his  statement 
of  the  faith  is  approved,  199, 
264,  308 ;  the  historical  posi- 
tion of  his  anathemas,  199  seq.  ; 
were  they  or  were  they  not 
accepted  at  Ephesus?  199  seq.  ; 
creed  delivered,  202 ;  his 
anathematisms  against  Nes- 
torius,  206,  210,  233,  234, 
238,  250 ;  was  accused  of 
Apollinarianism  by  Nestorius, 
213,  238;  a  controversialist, 
215  ;  pronounces  sentence  of 
deposition  on  Nestorius,  218, 
223-4,  238;  an  object  of 
attack  in  the  Conciliabulum, 
226,  227,  228,  238,  239  ;  wrote 
a  letter  to  John,  Bishop  of 
Antioch,  250,  299,  308;  his 
teaching  about  the  theotocos, 
251-2,264;  accepted  as  teach- 
ing the  true  faith,  259,264  ;  his 
writing  and  teaching  accepted 
by  Vigilius,  322 ;  sent  true 
copy  of  the  proceedings  of  the 
Nicene  Council  to  Carthage, 
508 ;  his  canonical  letter  to 
Domnus,  615. 

Cyril,  Bp.  of  Jerusalem,  92,  128, 
137,  162,  173,  189;  account 
of  his  catechetical  lectures, 
137. 


Dances,  public,  of  women  in  un- 
christian fashion,  393 ;  also 
of  men  in  the  same  fashion, 
are  to  be  abolished,  393 ;  de- 
scription of  ancient,  393. 

Deaconess.     [See  Clergy.] 

Dead  may  not  be  given  the  Eucha- 
rist, 401. 

Dead,  service  for  the,  100  ;  prayer 
for  the  souls  of  the,  101 ;  bap- 
tism or  eucharist  shall  not  be 
given  to  the  bodies  of  the,  450. 

Decretals,  the  false,  xxxiv,  xxxv ; 
collections,  xxxv. 

Defensor.     [See  Clergy.] 

Demoniacs,  those  pretending  shall 
endure  the  penance  of  demo- 
niacs, 392 ;  later  claims  to 
demoniacal  possession,  392. 

Demons,  theories  upon,  318. 

Deposed,  one  praj'ing  with  a  de- 
posed clergyman  as  such  is 
deposed,  594. 

Desideratus,  Bp.  of  Verdun,  ar- 
ranging a  loan,  38. 

Deut.  xxii.,  5,  97. 

Devils,  their  double  power  over 
men,  147-8,  392. 

Diaconicum  or  vestry  in  church, 
26,  140. 

Dice,  neither  layman  nor  cleric 
shall  play  at,  388,  597  ;  those 
playing  at  are  liable  to  penalty, 
382,  597. 

Dicymbala,  at  the  Great  Church, 
in  Constantinople,  353. 

Diclache  {hiUxh),  136,  137,  603  n. 

Didaskale  of  the  Apostles,  137; 
incorporated  in  the  Apostolical 
Constitutions,  137. 

Digamists,  objected  to  by  the 
Cathari,  19,  20 ;  excursus  on, 
75  seq. ,  125 ;  restricted  use  of 
the  term,  72  ;  may  receive  the 
communion,  125. 

Digamy,  priest  is  not  to  be  present 
at  the  nuptials,  82  ;  is  subject 
to  discipline,  82,  125,  362; 
different  kinds,  125,  362;  is 
a  bar  to  ordination,  363,  366, 
595;  always  incapacitated  the 
clergy  for  the  episcopate, 
363  ;  yet  often  indulged  and 
dispensed  with,  363,  607  ;  how 
penanced,  604. 

Digest,  the  Roman  legal,  xxx. 

Diocese,  variations  in  the  use  of 
the  word,  184,  470  ;  width  of 
its  meaning  in  the  4th  century, 
184. 

Diocletian,  his  death,  62  n. 

Diogenes,  a  lapsed,  62. 

Dionysius,  Abp.  of  Alexandria, 
600  ;  his  replies  to  Basilides 
the  bishop,  600;  their  date 
about  247  a.d.  ,  600. 

Dionysius  Exiguus  translated  the 
body  of  Canons,  591  ;  his  re- 
lation to  the  Apostolical  Canons, 
591,  592;  his  visit  to  Rome, 
592  ;  made  several  collections 
of  canons,  xxxiv,  591,  592  ; 
his  Easter  calculations,  56. 


Dioscorus,  Bp.  of  Alexandria, 
247,  276,  285,  344;  was  con- 
demned at  Chalcedon  with 
his  associates,  248,  259,  260, 
261 ;  text  of  his  condemna- 
tion, 260. 

Diptychs,  written  tables,  482; 
names  in  honour  were  read 
from  them,  482;  disgrace  to 
have  one's  name  omitted,  481, 
482. 

Disciplina  arcani,  a  hindrance  to 
archaeological  inquiries,  136. 

Discipline,  the  public,  excursus  on, 
25  seq.;  in  different  periods, 
25,  402 ;  was  intended  to  be  a 
moral  reality,  29;  not  for  a 
covering  over  the  wound,  29; 
for  the  lapsed  catechumens, 
31;  unjust,  how  met,  46;  is 
neutralised  by  party  rivalries, 
230  ;  is  valid  against  heretical 
restoration,  230. 

Dispensation,  by  the  bishop  alone, 
67 ;  a  dangerous  expedient, 
84  ;  frequent  instances  relat- 
ing to  marriage,  363  ;  for  one 
clerk  to  hold  two  country 
churches,  565. 

Divination  and  Diviners,  how  dis- 
ciplined, 611. 

Divine  monarchy,  167. 

Divorce  under  the  bishop,  48 ;  its 
general  conditions,  49,  605 ; 
subsequent  marriage  forms 
adultery,  609. 

Divorced  women  shall  not  be  mar- 
ried to  a  cleric,  595 ;  man 
married  to  such  shall  not  be 
ordained,  595. 

Doctrine  based  on  the  traditional 
faith,  2. 

Door,  the  subdeacon's  place  at, 
141.    [See  Clergy.] 

Doorkeeper.     [See  Clergy.] 

Doxology,  traditional  authority 
for'by  use,  610. 

Dress,  its  exchange  by  the  Eusta- 
thians  anathematised,  97. 

Drink,  strong-made,  shall  not  be 
used  for  eucharist,  594. 

Drinking,  clubs  for,  must  not  be 
formed  by  clergy  or  laity, 
157;  bishop,  presbyter,  and 
deacon,  shall  not  be  given  to 
them,  597 ;  neither  shall  sub- 
deacon,  reader,  singer,  or  lay- 
man, 597. 

Drugs,  those  giving  and  those  re- 
ceiving for  abortion  are  guilty 
of  murder,  404. 

Dying,  must  not  be  deprived  of 
their  viaticum,  29,  46,  65, 
74,  79 ;  in  discipline,  if  he  re- 
cover after  receiving  the  viati- 
cum, 29,  65. 

East,  its  teaching  upon  the  diviue 
procession.  167  ;  agrees  with 
West  on  the  theological  ques- 
tion, 167,  168  ;  its  bishops  are 
to  manage  the  East  alone,  176; 
praying  toward  the  east,  610. 


INDEX   OF  SUBJECTS 


653 


Easter,  synodical  letter  on  53, 
54  ;  Decree  on  the  keeping  of, 
108,  508;  synod  held  on  the 
controversy,  17,  108 ;  Day, 
42,  508;  Rule,  44;  settle- 
ment, 54  seq.,  108,  508;  not 
to  follow  the  Jewish  reckon- 
ing, 54,  55,  108;  excursus 
on  its  later  history,  55  seq.  ; 
cycles,  55-6,  108  n.;  present 
differences,  56  n. ;  called  the 
great  day,  65 ;  its  lawful  tra- 
dition is  to  be  followed,  108  ; 
Council  of  Nice  probably  took 
action  on  the  question,  108  ; 
had  a  custom  of  sending  the 
eulogise,  132;  the  feast  and 
Easter  Week  are  to  be  free 
from  labour,  395  ;  they  are  to 
be  devoted  to  religious  rejoic- 
ing in  the  holy  churches,  395  ; 
but  are  not  to  have  horse-rac- 
ing or  public  shows,  395 ; 
day  fixed  should  be  announced 
in  synod,  459,  478,  508; 
time  calculated  at  Alexandria, 
and  word  sent  out,  508  ;  shall 
not  be  celebrated  before  the 
vernal  equinox,  594 ;  time 
for  baptisms  and  the  reception 
of  penitents,  611. 

Easter  Even,  its  importance  in 
Russia,  134 ;  the  ancient  time 
for  baptism,  153. 

Easter  Week,  its  celebration  in 
East  and  West,  395 ;  calcula- 
tions for  the  keeping  of,  433 
seq.  ;  the  feast  day  is  to  be  an- 
nounced at  the  synod  of  the 
church  of  Carthage,  466  ;  the 
octave  day  of  the  holy  Easter 
(Low  Sunday),  473. 

Ecclesiastical  order  as  a  law  and 
guide,  183. 

Ecclesiasticus  is  called  at  Ephesus 
"the  divinely  inspired  Script- 
ure," 236  ;  xxxii,  19,  236  n. 

Economist.     [See  Clergy.] 

Ecumenical  canon  may  be  of  tem- 
porary force,  93. 

Ecumenical  Council,  first,  at  Nice, 
325  A.D.,  1  seq.;  not  exposi- 
tory but  witness  bearing,  2  ; 
why  the  council  at  Sardica 
was  not  ecumenical,  435 ;  how 
the  Seventh  Council,  the 
second  of  Nice,  was,  523  seq. , 
531 ;  the  six  holy  and  ecu- 
menical synods,  533,  540, 
549,  555 ;  definition  of  the 
name  and  thing,  xi ;  Rome's 
expansion  of  the  idea,  xi  n.  ; 
not  equivalent  to  general 
council,  xii ;  in  what  sense  in- 
fallible, xii ;  value  of  even 
their  obiter  dicta,  xii ;  seven 
properly  so  called,  xii ;  called 
together  by  princes,  xii. 

Ecumenical  Council,  its  relation 
to  the  Roman  see,  xii  seq. ; 
the  number — seven,  xv  ;  list  of 
councils  having  a  claim  to 
ecumenicity,  xv. 


Edessa,  church  had  38  deacons,  86. 

Eggs,  as  used  during  Lent  in  Arme- 
nia, are  prohibited,  391. 

Egypt,  its  ancient  customs  are  to 
prevail,  13;  interpretation  of 
the  canon,  13, 14  ;  diocese  un- 
der Alexandria,  15,15,  16,  53, 
54,  176  ;  had  its  metropolitan, 
16;  its  interests  before  Nicene 
synod,  53-4. 

Egyptian  bishops,  their  scruples 
met  by  the  fathers  at  Chalce- 
don,  291 ;  are  only  required 
to  wait  and  give  bonds  or 
their  oath,  291 ;  their  action 
explained,  291-2. 

Embezzlement  of  church  revenues 
forbidden  by  canon,  95,  120, 
121. 

Embezzlers  of  church  benefactions 
are  under  anathema,  95. 

"Emmanuel  is  very  God,"  206, 
214,  252;  the  Nestorian  no- 
tion of,  206,  212,  214,  252. 

Emperor  within  the  sacrarium,  26; 
appeals  to,  how  restricted, 
1 1 4, 42 1 ,  494 ;  how  venerated, 
322 ;  by  ancient  tradition  he 
entered  the  sanctuary  to  make 
his  offering,  396,  396  ;  may 
without  offence  be  asked  for 
an  episcopal  trial,   494. 

Emperors,  petition  to,  about  the  re- 
moval of  idols,  470,  472  ;  pe- 
tition that  the  clergy  be  not 
compelled  to  give  testimony, 
472;  that  they  stretch  forth  a 
helping  hand  to  the  church, 
489  ;  their  relation  to  the  ecu- 
menical councils,  xii,  xiii. 

Enchanter,  the  definition  of,  151  ; 
priesthood  or  clergy  shall  not 
be,  151. 

Enchanters  are  to  be  avoided, 
393. 

Energumens,  where  they  stood  in 
church,  26  ;  how  they  were 
dismissed,  138;  how  classed, 
147. 

Eparchies.     [See  Clergy.] 

Ephesians  ii.  14, 15,  530;  v.  23,  385. 

Ephesus.  The  Third  Ecumenical 
Council,  431  a.d.,  191  seq.;  the 
council,  18,  23,  59,  167,  187, 
200,  201,  286,  302;  preceded 
by  a  controversy  between  Ce- 
lestine  and  Nestorius,  xiii, 
192 ;  was  summoned  by  Theo- 
dosius  II.  to  consider  the  Nes- 
torian heresy,  192  seq.,  237, 
359 ;  was  under  the  presidency 
of  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  193, 
219,  232 ;  had  the  Nicene 
Creed  read  and  approved,  193, 
194,  237,  249  ;  examined  and 
approved  the  teaching  of  Cy- 
ril, 193,  237  ;  examined  and 
condemned  the  teaching  of 
Nestorius,  194,  359;  had 
neither  emperor  present,  196  ; 
had  Candidian  to  represent  the 
Emperors,  196  ;  extracts  from 
the  acts  of  the  council,  199, 


218,  219,  223  ;  it  probably  ap- 
proved Cyril's  letter  and  anath- 
emas, 199  seq.,  218,  237  ;  in 
vain  summoned  John  of  Anti- 
och  and  his  allies  to  join  the 
synod,  239;  decree  of  the 
council  against  Nestorius,  218, 
238 ;  criticism  of  the  usual 
translation  of  the  decree,  218, 

219  ;  Letter  of  Pope  Celestine 
to    the    Synod    of    Ephesus, 

220  seq. ;   the    eight    canons, 

225  -  235  ;  decree  deposing 
sympathizers  with  Nestorius, 
225,  239;  convened  by  the  de- 
cree of  the  Emperors,  225, 
237  ;  history  of  John  of  Anti- 
och's  Conciliabulum,  226  seq., 
238 ;  canons  intended  to  pre- 
vent alliance  with  Nestorius, 

226  seq.  ;  number  of  Ephesine 
canons,  231,  235;  called  "this 
holy  and  ecumenical  synod," 
231 ;  how  far  it  prohibited 
any  addition  to  the  Nicene 
faith,  231,  232,  233,  234  ;  let- 
ter to  the  synod  in  Pamphylia 
concerning  Eustathius,  236  ; 
letter  of  the  synod  to  Pope 
Celestine,  237  seq.  ;  full  report 
made  by  the  synod  to  Pope 
Celestine,  237-239  ;  definition 
of  the  synod  against  the  Mes- 
salians,  Euchetas  or  Enthusi- 
asts, 240 ;  decree  of  the  synod 
in  the  matter  of  Euprepius  and 
Cyril,  242;  the  Tome  of  S. 
Leo,  254  seq. ;  sentence  of  deg- 
radation on  Dioscorus,  259, 
260 ;  confirmed  the  rule  of 
faith  given  at  Nice,  Constan- 
tinople and  Ephesus,  260, 
262 ;  condemned  Nestorius 
and  Eutyches,  260,  308 ;  its 
faith  confirmed  by  the  Quin- 
isext  Council,  359  ;  its  canons 
confirmed  by  the  Quinisext 
Council,  361 ;  its  relation  to 
the  Roman  see,  xiii,  xiv. 

Epiphanius,  Bp.  of  Salamis,  52, 
101,  128,  163,  168,  240,  545  ; 
his  creed,  163,  164;  gives  the 
creed  to  be  learned  and  taught, 
163  ;  in  favor  of  clerical  celi- 
bacy, 52. 

Episcopium  at  Constantinople,  and 
what  it  was,  561, 562,  564,  567. 

Epistle,  air6<rTo\os,  133. 

Epitome,  the  ancient,  of  Nicene 
Canons,  xi,  1,  42,  8-42;  of 
Ancyra,  63-75 ;  of  Neo-Cse- 
sarea,  79-86 ;  of  Gangra,  92- 
100  ;  of  Antioch  in  JSncceniis, 
108-121 ;  of  Laodicea,  125- 
159  ;  of  Constantinople,  381, 
382  a.  d.,  172-185;  of  Chalce- 
don,  451  a.d.,  267-291  ;  of 
Council  in  Trullo  or  Quini- 
sext, 360-408  ;  of  Sardica,  415- 
433;  of  African  Code,  442- 
510  ;  of  II.  Nice,  555-570. 

Epitrachilion  (eimpa.xi\Mov),  142, 
143. 


654 


INDEX   OP   SUBJECTS 


Equitius,  bishop  of  Hippo-Diar- 
rhytus,  480  ;  was  condemned 
and  repelled,  474,  475 ;  his 
place  was  supplied  by  a  bishop 
appointed  by  a  deputation, 
480. 

Eremites,  clothed  in  black,  act  dis- 
orderly, 385,  385 ;  bring 
odium  on  their  profession, 
385 ;  must  receive  the  habit  of 
the  monks  and  the  tonsure, 
385  ;  must  be  shut  in  a  monas- 
tery and  counted  as  monks, 
385  ;  or  they  shall  be  expelled 
from  cities  and  banished  to  the 
desert,  385  ;  represented  in 
the  later  dervishes  and  vaga- 
bond monks,  385. 


EUCHARIST. 

Agapse,  love  feast,  96,  461  ; 
spurned  by  those  invited  to  it, 
96 ;  those  making  it  ought 
to  be  respected,  96 ;  the  posi- 
tion of  the  Agapne  discussed, 

96,  97,  461  ;  its  relation  to  the 
Holy  Eucharist,  97,  461  ;  its 
later  forms  and  survivals,  97  ; 
none  may  carry  away  their 
portion  from,  148 ;  may  not 
be  held  in  the  Lord's  houses 
or  churches,  148,  398,  462. 

Alms,  part  of  the  sacrificial  action, 

14. 
Antidoron,  as  related  to  the  Agapae, 

97,  132  ;  explanation  of  ,"132. 
Azymes,  370. 

Bread,  consecrated,  sent  as  Eulo- 
gies, 132,  132  ;  differences  in 
sending  and  in  blessing,  132; 
offered  for  consecration  and 
was  called  holy,  132 ;  was 
given  with  prayer,  85. 

Bread  and  Wine  in  Communion, 
63,  64,  85,  147;  how  distribut- 
ed, 85,  85,  147;  consecrated, 
sent  as  Eulogiw,  132  ;  the  re- 
mainder, how  consumed,  141 ; 
and  how  ordered  in  the  Eng- 
lish Church  to  be  consumed, 
141  n. ;  given  by  the  priest,  and 
not  by  deacon  or  subdeacon, 
147;  commixture  of  the  conse- 
crated and  unconsecrated,  389 ; 
how  to  be  received  as  the  Im- 
maculate Body,  407,  408,408. 

Chalice,  withdrawal  of  the,  31. 

Communicate  without  oblation, 
65,  66,  67,  70;  meaning  of 
the  action,  65. 

Communion,  the  Holy,  29,  30,  65, 
155,  156  ;  spiritual,  30  ;  highly 
valued  for  the  sick  and  dying, 
29,  30,  79;  open  to  all  but  to 
those  under  penance,  47 ;  ex- 
clusion from,  64,  79 ;  with  ex- 
communicated is  forbidden, 
109;  of  the  faithful  described, 
136,  138  ;  how  administered 
in  the  early  church,  147  ;  was 
always  prepared  for  by  fast- 


Eucharist—  Continued. 

ing,  155  ;  the  universal  law  of 
fasting  reception  of,  155,  156  ; 
"having  received  his  Holy 
Flesh  and  the  Precious  Blood 
of  Christ  the  Saviour  of  us 
all,"  203;  the  true  life-giving 
food,  203,  204, 217  ;  body  and 
blood  of  the  Word,  217  ;  the 
truth  as  used  against  Nesto- 
rius's  teaching,  217 ;  "  the  im- 
maculate communion"  shall 
not  be  given  for  money,  376 ; 
clergy  demanding  money  for 
it  are  liable  to  deposition,  376  ; 
was  taken  home  by  the  faith- 
ful and  partaken  of,  392  ;  but 
this  was  abused  and  forbidden, 
392,  392. 

Communion  of  the  Sick.  [See 
Sick.] 

Consecration  essential  to  the  Eu- 
charistic  idea,  14  n.,  138,  139. 

Consecration  prayer,  its  place  in 
the  Eucharist,  14  n.,  138,  139. 

Cup,  the,  given  with  prayer,  85. 

Cup,  given  by  the  deacon  but  not 
by  the  subdeacon,  147  ;  how 
blessed  by  the  deacon,  147, 
147. 

Epistle  (air6(TTo\os)  in  the  liturgy, 
133,  136. 

Eucharist,  name  given  to  the  sacred 
meal,  14;  given  to  the  sick 
and  dying,  29,  79  ;  its  relation 
to  the  viaticum,  29  ;  given  to 
infants  in  the  early  church,  29 ; 
in  what  order  delivered  to  the 
clergy,  38 ;  accounted  a  sacri- 
fice offered,  39  ;  accounted  a 
sacrifice  and  offering  of  the 
Body  of  Christ,  39  ;  the  power 
of  offering  restricted  to  bish- 
ops and  presbyters,  39 ;  ancient 
doctrine  of,  39;  teaching  of 
the  Nicene  fathers  upon,  39 ; 
its  relation  to  the  Agapae,  96, 
97,  461  ;  one  who  comes  to 
church  and  turns  away  from 
the  Eucharist  is  to  be  excom- 
municated, 108, 109;  one  who 
refuses  to  join  in  the  people's 
prayers  is  to  be  excommuni- 
cated, 108, 109  ;  turning  from, 
for  different  reasons,  109;  a 
feast  and  unsuitable  for  the 
Lenten  fast,  156  ;  service  for, 
in  the  early  church,  136  ;  ser- 
vice began  with  the  epistle  and 
gospel,  136;  full  description  of 
the  service,  138 ;  only  upon 
Saturday  and  Sunday  in  Lent, 
155;  the  Unbloody  Sacrifice, 
203,  380;  the  sacrifice  of  the 
Great  God  who  is  both  offering 
and  high  priest,  362;  a  sacri- 
fice apprehended  by  the  intel- 
ligence, 362;  grapes  offered 
with  the  Eucharistic  oblation 
an  old  custom,  378,  378  ;  this 
offering  of  grapes  and  Euchar- 
ist is  forbidden,  378, 460,  594 ; 
oblation  is  for  quickening  of 


Eucharist —  Continued. 

souls  and  remission  of  sins, 
378;  the  unbloody  sacrifice  of 
the  oblation,  378;  "the  holy 
mysteries  of  the  altar,"  378; 
shall  not  be  celebrated  in  pri- 
vate oratory  without  the  bish- 
op's leave,  379;  shall  be  cele- 
brated with  wine  and  water 
mixed,  380,  380,  460;  shall 
not  be  with  wine  only,  379 ; 
Hydroparastatae,  heretics,  used 
water  only,  380;  authorities 
given  for  the  use  of  mixture 
of  wine  and  water,  380,  380  ; 
spiritual  reasons  for  use  of 
mixture,  380,  380;  ceremo- 
nial use  of  wine  and  hot  water, 
380;  called  the  Holy  Mys- 
teries and  to  be  frequented  in 
the  Easter  season,  395;  may 
not  be  given  to  the  dead,  401, 
401  ;  the  proper  mode  of  re- 
ceiving the  Immaculate  Body, 
407,  408,  408  ;  should  not  be 
given  to  the  bodies  of  the  dead, 
450,  451 ;  a  season  devoted  to 
continence,  445,  454,  455; 
made  by  a  fasting  priest,  155, 
378,  461,  464;  called  the 
Lord's  Supper,  461 ;  the  his- 
tory of  this  name,  461 ;  noth- 
ing to  be  offered  but  what  the 
Lord  has  ordained,  594. 

EvKoylai,  or  panis  benedictus,  32, 
132;  made  up  from  The  Holy 
Things,  132  ;  with  what  object 
they  were  blessed,  132;  sent 
out  as  a  sign  of  fellowship, 
122 ;  those  of  heretics  cannot 
be  received,  149 ;  those  of  her- 
etics are  rather  a\oyiai  than 
evAoyiai,  149. 

Fraction  of  the  Bread,  139. 

Gospel  in  the  Liturgy,  133,  136, 
138. 

Holy  Communion.  [See  Commun- 
ion and  Eucharist.] 

Holy  Mysteries,  the,  127. 

Holy  Things,  the  (ret  0710,  sancta), 
132;  question  as  to  the  mean- 
ing in  the  canon,  132  ;  Eulogim, 
132. 

Intinction,  a  practice  in  commu- 
nicating, 31. 

Invocation  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to 
sanctify  the  Eucharist,  610. 

Last  Supper,  how  carried  out  by 
Christ,  155,  156. 

Liturgies,  136, 139  ;  earliest  form, 
136  ;  may  be  reduced  to  four 
types,  137 ;  references  to  in 
other  works,  137. 

Liturgy  of  the  Presanctified,  its  use 
in  Lent,  389,  389 ;  account  of 
the  Rite,  389. 

Love-feast.     [See  Agapae.] 

Mass,  its  early  use,  446. 

Mass  of  the  Presanctified,  389  seq. 

Missa  of  different  kinds,  32,  155. 

Mixture  of  water  and  wine  in  the 
Eucharist,  379,  380 ;  spiritual 
reasons  for  this  mixture,  379, 


INDEX   OF  SUBJECTS 


655 


Eucharist —  Continued. 

380  ;  commixture  of  the  con- 
secrated and  unconsecrated 
wine,  389.     [See  Eucharist.] 

Non-communicants  receive  the 
Antidora,  132. 

Non-communicating  attendance, 
26,  27,  594 ;  a  cause  of  disor- 
der in  the  church,  594. 

Oblation,  without  the,  26 ;  the 
making  it  is  part  of  the  priestly 
function,  38,  83,  85 ;  refused  in 
the  house  of  a  married  person 
by  Eustathians,  91 ;  offered  in 
private  houses,  91,  158;  re- 
fused from  a  married  presby- 
ter, 93 ;  the  Holy,  as  set  about, 
136;  must  not  be  made  by 
bishop  or  presbyter  in  a  private 
house,  158,  379;  is  the  un- 
bloody sacrifice,  158,  380;  is 
to  be  made  only  at  the  altar, 
158;  is  not  to  be  with  the  sac- 
rament and  first  fruits  to- 
gether, 378 ;  nothing  to  be  of- 
fered but  what  the  Lord  has 
ordained,  594;  yet  some  ex- 
ceptions named,  594;  what 
things  may  or  may  not  be  of- 
fered on  the  altar,  594.  [See 
Eucharist.] 

Passover  bread,  370. 

Reservation  in  Holy  Communion, 
30,  141,  392,  614  n. ;  instances 
of  in  ancient  times,  30,  392 ; 
for  the  viaticum,  31. 

Sacrifice  of  the  Eucharist  defined, 
14,  14  n.  ;  testimony  of  the  un- 
bloody, 530.  [See  Eucharist 
and  Oblation.] 

Sacrificial  idea  of  the  Lord's  Sup- 
per, 13  seq.  [see  Eucharist 
and  Oblation]  ;  its  develop- 
ment in  the  church,  14 ;  be- 
longing also  to  prayer,  14 ; 
belonging  to  almsgiving,  14. 

Sick,  communion  of,  excursus  on, 
30  seq.  ;  viaticum  to  the  dying, 
29,  29,  30. 

Solemn  entrance  to  the  altar,  140. 

Supper,  the  Lord's,  13 ;  its  sacri- 
ficial idea,  13,  14 ;  was  con- 
nected with  Agapce,  14  ;  was 
first  associated  with  the  priest- 
hood by  Cyprian,  14  ;  Cyprian 
promoted  the  sacrificial  idea, 
14. 

Synaxis,  the,  407. 

Unleavened  bread  orazymes,  370; 
used  by  the  Latins,  370. 

Viaticum,  communion  for  the  dy- 
ing, 29, 29,  30,  31 .    [See  Sick.] 

Wine,  commixture  of  the  conse- 
crated and  unconsecrated,  389. 


Eunuchs,  eligible  or  ineligible  for 
the  ministry,  8,  595  ;  Leontius 
made  a  bishop,  8  n.  ;  forbidden 
by  Roman  law,  8 ;  their  self- 
mutilation  always  condemned, 
8,  595 ;  restricted  regarding 
the  women  to  be  had  in  their 


house,  364 ;  by  nature  or  vio- 
lence may  become  bishops, 
595. 

Eusebius  Pamphili,  bishop  of 
Csesarea  and  historian,  3,  34 ; 
his  creed,  1,  3  ;  epistle  to  his 
own  church  referred  to,  3. 

Eusebius  of  Nazianzum,  account 
of  his  translations,  34  ;  reasons 
suggested  for  his  translations, 
34. 

Eusebius  of  Nicomedia  was  trans- 
lated from  Berytus,  32. 

Eustathius  of  Antioch  was  trans- 
lated from  Berrhcea,  32 ;  in 
favor  of  celibacy,  52. 

Eustathius,  bishop  of  Berytus, 
his  case  decided  at  Chalcedon, 
277,  290,  291. 

Eustathius  of  Sebaste  and  his  par- 
tisans were  condemned  at  Gan- 
gra,  91,  100,  556. 

Euthymius,  Life  of,  18. 

Eutychianus,  his  ordinations  are 
to  be  recognized,  431. 

Evagrius,  deacon,  316  ;  condemned 
at  II.  Constantinople,  316,  344, 
360. 

Evodius,  African  bishop,  480, 
488 ;  put  to  death  by  the  pa- 
gans, 495. 

Excommunicated,  to  be  avoided, 
47;  "excommunicated  and 
cast  out  of  the  church,"  108, 
109  ;  one  such  cannot  be  ac- 
cepted as  accuser  of  a  bishop, 
183;  one  such  who  receives 
the  communion  is  self-con- 
demned, 456;  cannot  be  ac- 
cepted as  accuser  of  the 
clergy,  504;  one  praying  with 
excommunicated  is  the  same, 
594. 

Excommunication,  to  be  respected 
by  other  bishops,  13,  46;  its 
grounds  investigated  by  semi- 
annual synods,  13;  not  to  be 
through  captiousness  or  con- 
tention, 13,  47 ;  to  be  done  ac- 
cording to  canon,  13  ;  may  be 
laid  on  clergy  or  laity,  1 3 ;  may 
be  mitigated  by  the  excom- 
municating bishop,  13  ;  may 
be  mitigated  by  the  synod  of 
bishops,  13  ;  special  sense  as 
applied  to  the  clergy,  35  ;  its 
meaning  doubtful,  282  ;  due  to 
a  bishop  who  communicates 
with  one  excommunicated, 
446. 

Exomologesis  or  the  Public  Disci- 
pline, excursus  on,  25  seq. 

Exorcism,  preparatory  for  baptism, 
185,  405  ;  delivering  from  the 
energy  of  the  devil,  392. 

Fmrula  in  the  church  building,  26. 

Faith,  apostolic,  is  traditional,  2, 
344  seq.;  the  Christian,  as 
stated  and  believed,  189,  197, 
1 98, 202-6, 299  seq. ,  3 1 1 ;  the 
Catholic  faith  and  heresy  in- 
volve more  than  a  logomachy, 


207 ;  the  faith  of  Nicsea  is  to 
be  received  by  all,  under  pen- 
alties, 231,  233  ;  the  definition 
issued  at  Chalcedon,  262,  310 ; 
writings  on  the  faith,  how 
tested  by  councils,  299  seq., 
310;  the  definition  issued  at 
Constantinople,  680,  681  a.d., 
344  seq. 

Faithful,  must  not  attend  heretical 
meetings  in  cemeteries,  etc., 
129  ;  are  put  under  discipline 
for  attending,  129;  must  not 
marry  heretics,  129 ;  or  give 
their  children  in  marriage  to 
heretics,  129;  the  communion 
of,  described,  138. 

Farms,  their  rent  going  to  churches, 
121.    [See  Steward.] 

Fasting,  a  universal  custom  as  pre- 
ceding communion,  155,  461 ; 
its  character  in  Lent,  156  ;  on 
fish  forbidden,  156  ;  on  oil  and 
shell-fish  forbidden,  156  ;  to  be 
observed  by  the  celebrant, 
378;  an  exemption  given  for 
Maundy  Thursday  by  Synod 
of  Carthage,  378,  461  ;  this 
exemption  abolished  as  a  dis- 
honouring of  Lent,  378;  one 
fasting  on  Sunday  or  Saturday 
(one  excepted)  shall  be  de- 
posed, 391,  598;  does  not  al- 
low eggs,  cheese,  or  what  is 
killed,  391 ;  must  be  observed 
to  the  midnight  of  the  Great 
Sabbath,  403;  special  days 
for  fasting,  598,  599  ;  on  the 
Lord's  Day  by  the  Eustathians, 
91 ;  forbidden  by  canon  at 
Gangra,  99 ;  forbidden  on  the 
Sabbath,  133  ;  preparatory  to 
baptism,  153 ;  must  not  be 
broken  on  Maundy  Thursday, 
155,  378. 

Fasts  of  the  Church,  their  canoni- 
cal authority,  100,  378;  to  be 
observed  with  respect  as  pre- 
scribed by  the  church,  100. 

Fasts,  the  Quadragesimal  of  Easter, 
the  Preparation,  the  4th  day, 
598;  that  of  the  Epiphanies 
which  was  on  Sunday,  613. 

Father,  His  relation  to  the  Son  de- 
fined, 4,  175 ;  His  relation  to 
the  Logos,  4, 175. 

Fathers,  their  duty  to  their  chil- 
dren, 98 ;  forbidden  to  neglect 
them  under  pretence  of  asceti- 
cism, 98  ;  "  ordered  by  the 
doctrine  of  our  fathers,"  376  ; 
"decrees  lately  made  by  the 
Fathers,"  393. 

Feasts,  single  and  double,  133  ;  of 
the  Jews,  heretics  or  heathen, 
are  forbidden  to  Christians, 
151,  151  ;  Christian,  and  how 
they  are  to  be  observed,  395, 
395  ;  counted  from  evening  to 
evening,  403,  404 ;  Greek,  to 
be  forbidden,  473  ;  their  better 
fare,  597. 

Ferial  days,  133. 


656 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


FiLioque  Clause,  Excursus  on, 
165  seq. ;  now  nor  ever  formed 
part  of  the  original  Constanti- 
nopolitan  Creed,  165, 166  ;  was 
added  contrary  to  the  Pope's 
wish  and  command,  165,  166, 
167 ;  was  never  intended  to 
teach  or  affirm  two  opxai,  165, 
167 ;  was  possibly  inserted 
unintentionally,  165,  167,  168, 
549  n.  ;  the  difference  between 
East  and  West  is  not  theologi- 
cal, 165  ;  authorities  on  ques- 
tion in  dispute,  165, 166,  549  n. ; 
the  phrase  is  of  early  Spanish 
origin,  166,  167,  168  ;  was  op- 
posed at  Rome,  166,  167 ;  em- 
ployed against  the  Priscillian- 
ists,  166  ;  creed  without  the 
Filioque  was  engraved  on 
shields  at  Rome,  167  ;  phrase 
was  accepted  by  the  Pope  in 
the  eleventh  century,  167  ;  sug- 
gestion for  the  insertion  of  the 
phrase,  168  ;  emplo3red  in  the 
eighth  century,  549  n. 

Fires  lighted  in  the  streets  are  to 
cease,  394;  customs  connected 
with  them,  394;  lighted  at 
the  new  moons,  394;  their 
pre-Christian  origin,  395. 

First-fruits,  of  the  church  squan- 
dered by  the  Eustathians,  91, 
95 ;  squandering  forbidden 
under  anathema,  95 ;  offered 
on  the  same  day  as  the  Eu- 
charist, 460;  offered  on  the 
Eucharistic  altar,  but  with  a 
separate  benediction,  460 ; 
only  kinds  to  be  offered  are 
grapes  and  corn,  460,  594 ; 
given  to  bishops  and  presby- 
ters, but  distributed  to  other 
clergy,  594. 

Flesh,  refused  by  some  priests,  69 ; 
the  eating  abhorred  by  the 
Eustathians,  91,  92;  those 
abhorring  it  were  put  under 
anathema,  92,  597  ;  to  be  used 
on  feast  days,  597. 

Florentius,  African  bishop,  re- 
ceived legation  against  the 
Donatists,  496. 

Food,  eating  it,  a  species  of  lapse, 
64. 

Forgiveness  of  trespasses  as  prayed 
for  by  the  Saints,  488,  499. 

Fornicators,  causing  abortion,  73 ; 
how  priests  are  to  be  disci- 
plined, 79 ;  how  fornicators 
are  to  be  dealt  with,  606, 
608,  611. 

Fortune-tellers  by  amulets  fates, 
genealogies,  are  to  be  avoided, 
etc.,  393. 

Fossarii,  fossores,  146,  147. 

Frankfort,  the  Council  of,  794  A.D., 
583  seq.  ;  its  relation  to  the 
Iconoclastic  controversy,  583  ; 
its  historical  position,  584 
seq. 

Freedmen  cannot  accuse  the 
clergy,  504. 


Free-will  in  the  Christian  profes- 
sion of  belief,  82,  82. 

Friday,  with  its  vigil,  134  ;  the  day 
for  the  catechumens  repeating 
the  creed,  399  ;  why  a  fasting 
day,  601. 

Funeral  of  bishop  and  clergy,  49. 

Gangra,  the  Council  of,  87  seq.  ; 
historical  position  of  the  coun- 
cil, 87,  88  ;  its  date  325-381 
A.D.,  89 ;  it  condemned  the 
Eustathians,  89  ;  its  president, 
89 ;  synodical  letter  of  the 
council,  91  ;  the  holy  synod 
as  its  proper  title,  91  ;  gave 
twenty  canons,  94. 

Gates,  those  in  the  church,  25, 
26. 

Gelasius  the  pope,  issued  his  decree 
de  libris  non  recvpiendis,  591. 

Gen.  i.  5,  404  ;  xxix.  20,  527. 

Generation,  how  true  of  the  Son, 
4. 

Gennadius  of  Constantinople,  his 
encyclical  letter,  615. 

76j/C7)&eVTd    ou    iroir]S)ivTa,     eXCUl'SUS 

on,  4. 

Oenuflectentes.     [See  Kneelers.] 

Gibbon,  his  misrepresentations  of 
historical  facts,  523,  538  n., 
575. 

Gloria  in  E.vcelsis,  135. 

God,  every  place  to  be  reverenced 
that  is  built  in  God's  name, 
101 ;  mysteriousness  of  his 
nature  and  person,  175  ;  the 
Son  is  one  in  the  Holy  Trinity, 
189;  "Emmanuel  is  Very 
God,"  206;  the  Father  Al- 
mighty, 254;  the  relation  of 
the  Father  and  the  Son,  313. 

Godhead,  the  oneness  of,  in  the 
Trinity,  181, 182. 

God-parents  shall  not  marry  their 
god-children,  390 ;  or  the  god- 
children's widowed  parents, 
390. 

Good  Friday,  its  special  observ- 
ance, 155,  389  seq. 

Gospels,  the,  to  be  read  on  the 
Sabbath,  133 ;  to  be  read  with 
the  other  Scriptures,  133. 

Goths,  their  conversion,  166. 

Grace,  as  harmonizing  with  free- 
will, 28  ;  as  preventing  the 
will  to  act,  81,  81 ;  is  not  to 
be  sold,  376;  the  sanctiflca- 
tion  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  376 ; 
as  denied  by  Pelagius,  497  ; 
as  a  help  and  inspiration,  497  ; 
as  an  essential  condition,  498. 

Grandmother  may  live  with  cleric, 
46. 

Grapes,  presented  as  thank  offer- 
ing, 378,  694;  shall  not  be 
offered  and  distributed  with 
the  Eucharist,  378;  shall  be 
offered,  blessed  and  distribut- 
ed apart,  378,  594. 

Gratian,  Benedictine  monk,  his 
collections  of  canons,  xxxiv, 
xxxv. 


Grave-desecrntor,  how  penanced, 
608,  611. 

Great  Day,  Easter,  66;  Prepara- 
tion, Good  Friday,  66  ;  Sab- 
bath, Easter  Eve,  66 ;  Week, 
Holy  Week,  66. 

Greece,  Synod  of,  47. 

Greek  canonists  in  error,  12; 
study  of  law  and  jurispru- 
dence, xxix. 

Gregory  Nazianzen,  14,  34,  131, 
162,  177,  180,  206,  273,  277, 
286,  545  ;  Metropolitan  of  Con- 
stantinople, 162  ;  his  transla- 
tion to  Constantinople  was 
disputed,  162,  177;  disliked 
synods  and  councils,  13  ;  his 
translations  accounted  for, 
34. 

Gregory  II.,  his  reputed  letters  to 
the  Emperor  Leo,  575  ;  reasons 
for  supposing  them  spurious, 
575  ;  Gibbon's  assertion  criti- 
cised, 575  ;  condemned  the 
Iconoclasts  before  any  coun- 
cil, xiv,  n. 

Gregory  Theologus  on  the  Books  of 
the  Old  and  New  Testament, 
612.    [See  Gregory  Naz.] 

Gregory  of  Nyssa,  story  of  his 
weeping  before  a  picture, 
539. 

Hadrian,  bishop  of  Rome.  [See 
Adrian.] 

Hair,  was  shaved  off  by  the  Eusta- 
thian  women,  99 ;  long,  a 
mark  of  beauty,  99 ;  long,  a 
symbol  of  subjection,  99 ;  has 
been  cut  off  for  different 
reasons,  99 ;  its  dressing  for- 
bidden as  a  bait  to  souls, 
406,  406  ;  its  dyes  and  wigs, 
406. 

Harlots,  those  who  procure  and 
bring  up,  shall  be  disciplined, 
402 ;  marriage  to  one  is  a  bar 
to  ordination,  595. 

Harmenopulus,  Constantine,  jurist 
and  canonist,  xxxiii ;  account 
of  him  and  his  work,  xxxiii, 
xxxiv. 

Healing  of  sickness  professed, 
129. 

Hearers,  a  grade  of  discipline,  24, 
27,  29,  31,  31,  64,  80,  153, 
602 ;  where  they  were  in  the 
Church,  26,  602 ;  degraded  by 
excommunication,  81 ;  are  not 
to  be  present  at  ordinations, 
126  ;  were  being  prepared  for 
baptism,  153  ;  the  first  grade 
of  the  catechumens,  153. 

Heathen  feasts,  64,  65,  66;  par- 
taking in,  64,  66  ;  eating  their 
own  food  at,  66 ;  their  feasts 
are  not  to  be  joined  in  by 
Christians,  151 ;  their  godless- 
ness  also  to  be  avoided,  151  ; 
churches  of  God  in  heathen 
nations  are  to  be  governed  by 
ancient  custom,  177,  177 ; 
mode  of  receiving  the  heathen 


INDEX   OF  SUBJECTS 


657 


into  the  Catholic  Church,  408; 
sons  of  clergymen  are  not  to 
marry  heathen  wives,  452 ; 
cannot  accuse  the  clergy,  504 ; 
discipline  for  resorting  to 
heathen  customs,  609. 

Heb.  xi.  21,  528. 

Hecatontarchs,  diviners  of  the  fut- 
ure, to  be  avoided,  393. 

Hecatostce,  369. 

Hegumenos.     [See  Clergy.] 

Heresies  anathematized  at  Con- 
stantinople, 381  a.d.,  172. 

Heresy,  a  bar  to  ordination,  23  ; 
is  it  a  bar  to  marriage  ?  397. 

Heretical  baptism,  as  held  invalid, 
128.     [See  Baptism.] 

Heretics,  marriages  with,  are  for- 
bidden, 149;  unless  they  are 
to  become  Christians,  149, 
149  ;  their  ettlogice  cannot  be 
received,  149 ;  their  eulogim 
are  rather  a\oyiai,  149;  where 
they  stood  when  under  pen- 
ance, 26  ;  how  they  are  to  be 
received,  46,  185;  when  in 
heresy  they  cannot  enter 
God's  house,  127;  yet  Valens 
was  allowed,  127  ;  when  con- 
verted must  anathematize  their 
heresies,  127,  185 ;  mode  of 
reconciliation  on  conversion, 
127,  185;  had  their  martyrs 
and  martyries,  129 ;  Christians 
shall  not  join  in  their  prayers, 
149;  and  their  martyrs  are 
aliens  from  God,  150;  they 
must  not  be  sought  after  by 
Christians,  150,  231;  it  is  not 
lawful  to  feast  with  them, 
151 ;  or  to  receive  portions 
from  their  feasts,  151 ;  cannot 
be  received  in  accusing  ortho- 
dox bishops,  183,  599;  their 
character  and  definition,  183  ; 
very  closely  allied  to  schis- 
matics, 183  ;  bishops  and  cler- 
gy, who  learn  from  them ,  shall 
be  deposed,  231 ;  child  may 
not  be  given  in  marriage  to, 
278, 452  ;  restrictions  on  mar- 
riage with,  279,  452;  how  the 
term  heretic  is  to  be  interpret- 
ed, 183  ;  questions  of  their  be- 
ing anathematized  after  death, 
303,  309 ;  how  they  are  to  be 
received  when  they  return  to 
orthodoxy,  405,  597,  604; 
fine  imposed  upon  the  ordainer 
and  the  ordained  by  Emperor 
Theodosius,  489;  cannot  ac- 
cuse the  clergy,  504,  599 ; 
how  they  and  their  adminis- 
trations are  to  be  treated  by  the 
clergy,  597 ;  their  ordination 
is  invalid  and  has  to  be  repeat- 
ed, 598  ;  baptism  has  to  be  re- 
peated, 598 ;  shall  not  be  wit- 
nesses against  bishops,  599 ; 
quote  from  Apocryphal  writ- 
ings, 603 ;  repentant  on  their 
death-bed,  they  shall  be  re- 
ceived, 604. 

VOL.  XIV. 


:  HERETICS   AND    HERESIES. 

Acacians,  175. 

Acacius  of  Caesarea,  175. 

Acephali,  332,  336. 

Acetius,  a  Novatian,  20. 

Aerians,  100,  101. 

Aetius,  175. 

Aldebert,  150. 

Anomseans,  7,  172,  173. 
!  Anthimus,  34. 

Apollinarianism,  169. 

Apollinarians,  were  anathematized 
at  Constantinople,  381,  a.d. 
172,  172,  173  seq.,  344,  347, 
349,  359 ;  mode  of  their  re- 
ception into  the  Catholic 
Church,  185,  405  ;  must  give 
a  written  renunciation  of  their 
errors,  185,  405 ;  and  are  to 
be  received  with  unction,  185, 
405  ;  their  teaching,  213,  312, 
332,  336. 
j  Apollinaris  (Apollinarius),  173 
seq,  341,  347,  355,  572. 

Apotactites,  heretics,  604;  they 
rebaptized,  607. 

Appolinius,  572. 

Arianism,  173. 

Arians,  6,  7, 106, 173, 175, 185, 189, 
332;  mode  of  their  reception 
into  the  Catholic  Church,  185, 
405,  603  ;  must  give  a  written 
renunciation  of  their  errors, 
185,  405 ;  and  are  to  receive 
unction,  185,  405 ;  how  to  be 
received  back,  47 ;  condemned 
for  heresy,  44,  172. 

Aristeri  (Cathari),  mode  of  their 
reception  into  the  Catholic 
church,  185,  405 ;  perhaps 
properly  called  Aristi,  186. 

Arius,  his  special  doctrines,  53, 
332,  347,  359,  360,  572;  con- 
demned at  Nicasa,  53,  344, 
347  ;  importance  of  the  differ- 
ence between  him  and  Athan- 
asius,  207. 

Basilides,  6. 

Bogomiles,  heretics,  100. 

Carpocrates,  6. 

Cathari,  how  received  back  into 
the  Catholic  and  Apostolic 
Church,  19, 20,  405 ;  their  or- 
dained clergy  may  continue  in 
the  ministry,  19,  20,  20 ;  their 
clergy  must,  on  conformity, 
accept  the  church's  dogmas, 
19,  20  ;  their  clergy,  on  con- 
formity, promise  to  communi- 
cate with  digamists,  19,  20 ; 
their  clergy,  on  conforming, 
promise  to  communicate  with 
the  disciplined  lapsers  in  per- 
secution, 19,  20,  20;  same  as 
Novatians,  20,  615  ;  must  sub- 
mit themselves  to  the  church's 
discipline,  19,  20  ;  their  bishop 
must  yield  to  the  Catholic  bish- 
op, 20,  20 ;  their  clergy  can- 
not be  promoted  in  the  Church, 
20;  their  bishops  may  be  re- 
tained as  chorepiscopi,  20,  20 ; 

u  u 


Heretics  and  Heresies — Continued. 
their  bishops  may  be  retained 
as  presbyters,  20,  20;  their 
bishops  may  be  retained  as 
bishops,  20,20;  they  refused 
pardon  to  the  lapsed,  20 ;  the 
question  of  their  reordination, 
21. 

Celestines,  followers  of  Celestius, 
239. 

Celestius,  friend  of  Nestorius  and 
heretic,  225,  225  seq.,  229, 
229  seq. ;  his  history  and  teach- 
ing, 229  seq.  ;  was  condemned 
with  Nestorius  at  Ephesus, 
229,  239  ;  friend  of  Pelagius, 
496. 

Circumcelliones  forbidden  by  the 
laws  and  condemned,  488. 

Collyridians,  130. 

Cyrus,  Bp.  of  Alexandria,  con- 
demned as  Monothelite,  344, 
347,  349,  353,  360,  550,  572. 

Didymus,  the  blind,  was  con- 
demned at  II.  Constantinople, 
316,  344,  360,  572;  con- 
demned at  II.  Nicsea,  550, 
572. 

Dioscorus,  was  condemned  at  Chal- 
cedon,  248,  259,  260,  261, 
344,  359,  360,  549,  572  ;  is  to 
be  anathematized  by  converts 
from  heresy,  405. 

Donatists,  112,  445,  463  seq.,  471, 
475,476,  477,  495,  499  ;  their 
origin,  464 ;  those  baptized  by, 
shall  be  received  on  conver- 
sion, 464,  471,  477;  African 
church  is  warned  against  them 
by  Pope  Anastasius,  475 ;  it 
was  decided  to  deal  with  them 
leniently,  475  ;  they  are  to  be 
received  on  conversion,  476, 
477  ;  their  orders,  477  ;  legation 
is  sent  to  them  from  the  Afri- 
can Bishops,  477;  meetings 
and  conferences  held  with 
them,  487,  488 ;  missive  of 
peace  overtures,  487 ;  their 
violence  against  the  Catholics, 
488  ;  commonitory  against  the, 
488  seq. ;  orders  issued  for 
their  expulsion,  490  ;  their  re- 
ception when  they  return,  492, 
493,  499;  decision  as  to  the 
churches  now  becoming  Cath- 
olic, 499 ;  decision  as  to  the 
conforming  bishops,  500;  also 
as  to  the  dioceses,  500 ;  tribu- 
nal set  up  for  disputed  cases, 
500,  501 ;  zeal  in  their  con- 
version, 500,  501,  502. 

Dyophysitism,  264. 

Encratites,  604,  607 ;  to  be  rebap- 
tized, 607 ;  would  not  eat 
flesh,  609. 

Enthusiasts.     [See  Messalians.] 

Erastianism  met  with  in  the  early 
church,  114. 

Euchetse.     [See  Messalians.] 

Eudoxians  were  condemned  at 
Constantinople,  381  a.d.,  172, 
175. 


G58 


INDEX   OF  SUBJECTS 


Heretics  and  Heresies — Continued. 

Eudoxius,  Bp.  of  Constantinople, 
172,  175,  603;  his  teaching, 
175. 

Eunomians  were  anathematized  at 
Constantinople,  172,  172,  173, 
189;  baptize  with  one  immer- 
sion, 185,  405  ;  the  mode  of 
their  reception  into  the  Cath- 
olic church,  185,  405. 

Eunomius,  his  life  and  teaching, 
175. 

Eusebians,  105,  106,  416. 

Eustathians,  89,  91  ;  statement  of 
their  disorders,  91 ;  followed 
their  private  opinions,  91 ; 
were  required  at  Gangra  to  re- 
pent and  forsake  their  errors, 
91 ;  summary  of  their  errors, 
91  seq. ;  canons  of  Gangra 
against  their  teaching,  92  seq.; 
their  spiritual  pride,  94,  101; 
had  probably  their  own  unmar- 
ried clergy,  94 ;  under  pre- 
tence of  asceticism  wore  the 
pei-ibolceum,  97  ;  despised  those 
wearing  the  berus,  97  ;  did  not 
recommend  divorce  but  conti- 
nence, 98 ;  forsook  and  neg- 
lected their  children,  and  were 
put  under  anathema,  98 ;  plead 
they  honor  piety  more  than 
parents,  99 ;  rejected  and  neg- 
lected the  church's  fasts,  100  ; 
taught  in  opposition  to  the 
canons  of  the  Apostles,  101 ; 
are  partisans  of  Eustathius, 
91 ;  utterly  abhor  marriage, 
91,  92,  95  ;  think  that  none 
in  a  marriage  state  has  hope 
in  God,  91,  96,  101 ;  their 
married  women  have  forsaken 
their  husbands,  91,  98,  99  ; 
and  fallen  thereby  into  sin, 
91;  then  husbands  have  left 
their  wives,  91,  95  ;  and  there- 
by fallen  into  sin,  91  ;  foment 
separation  from  the  houses  of 
God,  91,  94,  94  ;  and  from  the 
Church,  91,  94 ;  treat  the 
church  and  its  members  with 
disdain,  91,  94,  95,  96 ;  set  up 
separate  meetings  and  assem- 
blies, 91,  94  ;  teach  doctrines 
opposed  to  the  church's,  91, 
100 ;  and  practices  opposed  to 
the  church's,  91,  98,  99,  100; 
wear  strange  apparel,  91,  97  ; 
call  all  their  adherents  saints, 
91 ;  squander  the  church's 
first  fruits  upon  their  saints, 
91,  95  ;  induce  slaves  to  leave 
their  masters,  91,  93 ;  and  in 
strange  dress  to  be  insolent  to 
their  masters,  91,  93  ;  women 
wear  men's  clothes,  91,  97; 
men  wear  women's  clothes, 
91,  97 ;  on  pretext  of  piety 
women  cut  their  hair,  91,  99 ; 
fast  on  the  Lord's  day,  despis- 
ing the  free  day,  91,  99 ;  eat 
on  the  church's  fasts,  91,  99; 
abhor  the  eating  of  flesh,  91, 


Heretics  and  Heresies — Continued. 
92 ;  abhor  prayers  made  in 
houses  of  the  married,  91 ; 
refuse  the  oblation  offered  in 
houses  of  married,  91 ;  con- 
temn married  presbyters,  91, 
93  ;  and  refuse  to  touch  their 
ministrations,  91,  93 ;  con- 
demn the  rich  who  do  not 
alienate  everything,  91 ;  for- 
sake the  canon  of  the  church, 
91,  101. 

(Eustathians)  condemn  the  services 
in  honor  of  the  martyrs,  91, 
100. 

Eustathius,  Bp.  of  Sebaste,  his 
pride  and  ambition,  100,  566. 

Eutyches,  246,  248,  254,  258,264, 
347,  549,  572  ;  condemned  at 
Chalcedon,  260,  264,  300,  312, 
344,  359,  360. 

Eutychianism,  18,  300,  312. 

Eutychians,  270,  302,  396. 

Euzoius,  Arian  leader,  603. 

Evagrius,  deacon,  condemned  at 
Constantinople  II.,  344,  360, 
549,  572. 

GaianitaB,  332. 

Galatians,  as  closely  related  to  her- 
etics, 185,  405. 

Gnostics,  their  baptism  considered 
invalid,  405. 

Heresies  anathematized  at  Constan- 
tinople, 381  A.D.,  172, 185, 186; 
difference  of  reading  as  to  her- 
etics or  heresies,  172. 

Honorius,  Bp.  of  Rome,  anathema- 
tized as  Monothelite,  342, 343, 
344,  347,  349,  351,  352,  353, 
360,  572 ;  excursus  on  his 
condemnation,  351  seq. ;  col- 
lection of  proofs  of  his  con- 
demnation, 351  seq. 

Hydroparastatae,  380,  380,  604; 
used  water  instead  of  wine  in 
the  Eucharist,  380. 

Macarius,  Bp.  of  Antioch,  was  con- 
demned as  Monothelite,  344, 
347,  349,  353,  360,  550; 
called  also  Themistius,  349. 

Macedonians,  172  seq.;  mode  of 
their  acceptance  into  the  Cath- 
olic church,  185,  405  ;  must 
give  certificates,  anathematize 
their  heresy  and  be  anointed, 
405. 

Macedonius,  173,  549,  572 ;  con- 
demned at  Constantinople  I., 
172,  173,  359,  360. 

Manichasans,  92,  405,  604;  the 
mode  of  their  reception  into 
the  church,  405;  received  on 
their  deathbed,  if  penitent, 
611. 

Marcellians,  were  anathematized  at 
Constantinople,  381  a.d.,  172, 
172,  176,  240 ;  were  called  also 
Euchetse,  and  Enthusiasts, 
240. 

Marcellusof  Ancyra,  163,  172, 176. 

Marcionites,  how  they  are  to  be  re- 
ceived into  the  church,  405, 
604. 


Heretics  and  Heresies — Continued. 

Maximilla,  supporter  of  Montanus, 
186. 

Maximiuian,  Bp.  of  Vagai,  476 ; 
was  forced  to  vacate  his  see, 
485,  485 ;  formed  a  party 
among  the  Donatists,  476. 

Maximinianists,  476,  477. 

Meletian  schism,  162,  186. 

Meletians,  24. 

Messalians,  Massalians,  Eucheta? 
or  Enthusiasts  were  con- 
demned at  Ephesus,  240  seq.  ; 
were  spoken  of  as  Euchites  and 
Corentes,  24 ;  their  history, 
opinions  and  practices,  241 ; 
were  Manichsean,  241. 

Monophysites,  400. 

Monophysitism,  264. 

Monothelite  heresy,  234,  327  seq., 
331  seq.,  342,  344  seq.,  353, 
360;  was  considered  by  the 
sixth  ecumenical  council,  327, 
331  seq.,  342,  353,  360;  was 
allied  with  many  heresies, 
332. 

Monothelites  were  anathematized, 
342,  344,  353,  360,  550. 

Montanism,  28,  128. 

Montanists,  their  baptism  declared 
invalid,  128 ;  suspected  of 
heresy  regarding  the  Trinity, 
128  ;  the  question  as  to  their 
position  was  long  open,  128  ; 
Hefele's  statement  of  the  facts, 
128 ;  their  doctrine  and  prac- 
tices, 128,  186  ;  had  doubtful 
teaching  as  to  baptism,  128  ; 
had  their  martyrs,  129;  their 
martyrs,  150  ;  are  to  be  re- 
ceived as  heathens,  185,  405; 
are  the  same  as  the  Phrygians, 
405  ;  the  mode  of  their  recep- 
tion into  the  church,  405. 

Montanus,  128,  186 ;  was  identi- 
fied with  the  Holy  Ghost,  128, 
186. 

Nestorian  bishops  lost  their  official 
jurisdiction,  228. 

Nestorianism,  18,  206  seq.,  300, 
396 ;  the  reality  of  its  false 
teaching,  207  seq. 

Nestorians,  302,  396  ;  allowed  the 
marriage  of  the  clergy,  365. 

Nestorius,  bishop  of  Constantino- 
ple, 19,  192  seq.,  207,  210  seq., 
228  seq.,  303,  549;  his  teach- 
ing condemned  by  Pope  Celes- 
tine,  xiii,  192  ;  refused  the 
Theotokos,  192,  207  ;  used  all 
his  influence  in  favour  of  his 
position  and  teaching,  192  seq., 
359,  360;  was  condemned  for 
his  teaching  by  the  Council  of 
Ephesus,  194  seq.,  199,  206, 
223  seq.,  238,  308,  344,  358, 
360;  Cyril's  letter  to,  197-9, 
199.  308;  Nestorius  was 
anathematized,  199,  206,  218, 
223  seq.,  238,  261,  299,  344; 
the  issue  of  his  controversy 
with  Cyril,  207,  308;  his 
teaching  set  out  in  his  anathe- 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


659 


Heretics  and  Heresies—  Continued. 
mas  against  Cyril,  206,  210, 
211,  212,  213,  214,  215,  216, 
217,  264  ;  his  teaching  met  by 
illustrations  from  the  Holy 
Communion,  217;  sentence  of 
deposition,  218,  223  seq., 
238,  308;  all  his  followers 
did  not  accept  his  teaching, 
226,  228  _;  clergy  maintaining 
his  doctrines  are  to  be  deposed, 
229,  231 ;  anathematized  by 
Ibas,  299,  303  ;  condemned  at 
Ephesus,  308  seq.;  con- 
demned at  Constantinople, 
307  seq. ;  his  teaching  as  con- 
demned, in  553  a.d.,  312  ;  con- 
demned also  at  Chalcedon, 
451  a.d.,  359,  360;  con- 
demned at  Nicaea  II.,  572. 

Noetus,  175. 

Novatian,  his  life  and  teaching, 
20;  was  consecrated  bishop 
irregularly,  20;  lapsed  into 
heresy,  20. 

Novatianism,  25. 

Novatians  or  Cathari,  20,  72,  185, 
405  ;  their  history  and  opin- 
ions, 20;  rebaptized  converts 
from  the  Catholic  church,  20  ; 
refused  pardon  to  the  lapsed, 
20 ;  rejected  all  second  mar- 
riages, 20  ;  how  they  are  to  be 
received  back,  47,  127,  185, 
405  j  in  favour  of  clerical 
marriages,  52  ;  when  converted 
they  must  anathematize  their 
heresies,  127,  185,  405  ;  and 
if  communicants,  must  be 
anointed  before  communion, 
127,  405;  and  must  have 
learned  the  symbols  of  the 
faith,  127;  their  baptism  was 
accepted  as  valid,  128 ;  a 
branch  of  the  Marcionists, 
607 ;  make  God  the  author  of 
evil,  607 ;  count  wine  a 
defiled  creature,  607;'  doubt 
entertained  as  to  their  exact 
position,  607. 

Origen,  condemned  at  Constanti- 
nople II.,  314,  344,  360,  361 ; 
condemned  by  seventh  ecu- 
menical council,  549,  572. 

Paul,  Bp.  of  Constantinople,  con- 
demned as  Mouothelite,  344, 
347,  349,  353. 

Paul,  Bp.  of  Samosata,  4,  40,  46, 
516  ;  has  given  name  to  the 
Paulianists,  40,  46 ;  Anti- 
Trinitarian  and  deposed  for 
heresy,  40. 

Paulianists,  on  reconciliation  to  the 
church,  must  be  rebaptized, 
40,  405 ;  if  ordained,  they 
must  be  rebaptized  and  re- 
ordained,  40;  if  they  are 
found  unworthy  the  clergy  are 
to  be  deposed,  40 ;  their  dea- 
conesses reckoned  among  the 
laity,  40,  40  ;  how  Paulianists 
are  to  be  received,  46,  405. 

Pelagianism,  excursus  on,  229  seq. 


Heretics  and  Heresies—  Continued. 

Pelagians,  followers  of  Pelagius, 
239. 

Pelagius,  monk  and  heretic,  229, 
230,  239 ;  his  doctrines  were 
condemned  in  Africa,  496  seq. ; 
his  friend  Celestius,  229,  239 ; 
bibliographical  table,  229, 
239. 

Pepuzenes,  heretics  mentioned  by 
Dionysius,  602. 

Pete)',  Bp.  of  Constantinople,  con- 
demned as  Monothelite,  344, 
347,  349,  353,  360. 

Photinians,  how  they  are  to  be  re- 
ceived on  conversion,  127, 176  ; 
on  reception  into  the  church, 
they  must  anathematize  every 
heresy,  127 ;  if  communi- 
cants, they  must  be  anointed 
before  communion,  127  ;  and 
have  learned  the  symbols  of 
the  faith,  127  ;  were  anathe- 
matized at  Constantinople, 
381  a.d.,  172,  172. 

Photinus,  124, 176  ;  his  dates,  124, 
176. 

Phrygians,  though  clergymen,  are 
to  be  instructed  and  baptized, 
128,  185,  405;  to  be  instruct- 
ed and  received  by  bishops 
and  presbyters  of  the  church, 
128  ;  had  their  martyrs,  129  ; 
are  to  be  received  as  heathens, 
185,  405 ;  were  Montanists, 
405. 

Pneumatomachi  were  condemned, 
172,  172  seq.,  189,  549;  their 
teaching,  189. 

Polychronius,  Monothelite,  347, 
349,  353,  360. 

Praxeas,  175. 

Priscillianists,  166. 

Puritans,  the,  604. 

Pyrrhus,  Bp.  of  Constantinople 
and  Monothelite,  327,  336, 
343,  347,  353,  360,  550,  572. 

Quartodecimans,  to  be  dealt  with 
as  heretics,  127,  185  ;  on  con- 
version must  anathematize 
their  heresies,  127,  185,  405  ; 
must  be  anointed  before  they 
communicate,  127,  185,  405  ; 
their  baptism  was  accepted  as 
valid,  127,  128,  405;  were 
called  Tetradites,  185,  405; 
their  principles,  186. 

Sabbatians,  mode  of  their  recep- 
tion into  the  Catholic  church, 
185. 

Sabbatius,  presbyter  and  Novatian, 
185. 

Sabellians,  4,  172,  172,  175,  185, 
189;  were  anathematized  at 
Constantinople,  381  a.d.,  172; 
'their  teaching,  175, 185,  189, 
405. 

Sabellians,  are  to  be  received  as 
heathens,  185,  405  ;  the  mode 
of  their  reception  into  catho- 
licity, 405. 

Saccophorians,  607 ;  to  be  rebap- 
tized, 607. 

U  U  2 


Heretics  and  Heresies — Continued 

Samosatenes  perverted  the  baptis- 
mal formula,  40  ;  their  teach- 
ing, 176. 

Saturninus,  6,  604. 

Schism  of  East  and  West,  169. 

Semi-arians  or  Pneumatomachi, 
6,  172,  172  seq. 

Sergius,  Bp.  of  Constantinople, 
Monothelite,  342,  344,  347, 
349,  360,  550,  572. 

Severus  (Monothelite),  336,  344, 
347,  349,  549;  is  to  be  anath- 
ematized by  converts  from 
heresy,  405. 

Simeon,  Abp.  of  Thessalonica,  34. 

Simon  Magus,  6. 

Stephen,  a  Monothelite,  344,  347, 
349,  353,  360. 

Tessareskaidecatitse,  how  received 
back  into  catholicity,  405. 

Tetradites  or  Quarto-decimans. 
[See  Quarto-decimans.] 

Themistius  (Macarius),  Monothe- 
lite, 344,  349. 

Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  con- 
demned at  Constantinople  II., 
302,  344,  360. 

Theodoret,  condemned  at  Constan- 
tinople II.,  302,  303,  344, 
360. 

Theodoras,  Bp.  of  Pharan,  con- 
demned at  Constantinople  III., 
344,  347,  353,  360. 

Theodosians,  332. 

Theodosius  of  Alexandria,  336. 

Theopaschites,  401. 

Timotheans,  332. 

Valentinians,  6,  604. 

Zois,  received  back  into  commun- 
ion, 604. 


Hiemantes,  penitents,  70. 

Hierax,  clergyman,  accused  of 
offences,  614. 

Highwaymen  are  to  be  penanced 
as  murderers,  611. 

Hippo,  decrees  of  synod  at  Hippo 
are  confirmed,  459. 

Eistoria  acephala,  discovered  by 
Maffei  at  Verona,  413. 

Holy  Ghost,  identified  with  Mon- 
tanus,  128  ;  glorified  the  Son, 
204,  214  ;  gave  the  Son  power 
to  work  miracles,  etc.,  214 ; 
His  relation  to  the  Son  and 
His  works,  215  seq.,  254. 

Holy  Oblation,  136. 

Holy  Scripture  and  the  Apostoli- 
cal traditions,  101. 

Holy  Trinity,  Photinians  heretical 
on  the,  127. 

Homicide,  involuntary,  its  pen- 
ance, 74. 

Homousios,  excursus  on,  1,  3; 
value  of  the  word  against  the 
Arians,  3,  4  ;  its  Trinitarian 
force,  4  ;  the  history  of  the 
usage  of  the  word,  4 ;  had 
an  appearance  of  heresy,  4 ; 
how  different  from  Synousios, 
4. 


660 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


Honey  arid  milk  should  not  be 
offered  on  the  altar,  392,  594 ; 
may  be  offered  on  the  altar 
but  with  a  separate  benedic- 
tion, 460. 

Honor,  external,  due  to  the  holy 
canon  and  God's  priesthood, 
108. 

Honorius,  Bp.  of  Rome,  Mono- 
thelite,  327,328,  342,  343; 
wrote  regarding  the  will  or 
wills  of  Christ,  xiv  n. 

Horologion,  The  (wpo\6yiov  rh  /ueya), 

133  n. 

Horse-races  shall  not  be  made  at 
Easter,  395. 

Hosea,  xiii.  14,  205  n. 

Hosius,  Bp.  of  Cordova,  51,  415, 
416,  417 ;  his  opinion  upon  the 
translation  of  bishops,  415; 
moves  the  canons  at  Sardica, 
415  seq. ;  probably  presided  at 
Nice,  xiii. 

Hospital  for  the  Sick,  uoaoKoixuov, 
273. 

Hospital  to  be  set  in  every  city, 
50;  description  of  several 
given,  273 ;  not  to  be  inter- 
fered with  by  foreign  clergy, 
275. 

Hostel,  ItvoZoxela,  pagan  and 
Christian,  275  seq. ;  allied  to 
the  -mwx^ov,  yet  differed,  275. 
[See  Hospital.] 

Hours    of    Prayer,    the    Jewish, 

134  ;  the  Christian,  134  ;  theo- 
ries as  to  the  origin  of  the 
Christian,  134. 

Houses,  Oblation  offered  in,  91 ; 
oblation  must  not  be  offered  in 
private,  158. 

Hunts,  their  exhibition  is  forbid- 
den by  canon,  388 ;  those 
frequenting  them  are  liable  to 
penalties,  388. 

Husbands  forsaking  their  wives 
and  abhorring  marriage,  91, 
96;  have  thereby  fallen  into 
sin,  91,  96. 

Hybernantes,  penitents,  70. 

Hymn,  Easter,  at  the  lighting  of 
the  lamps,  135. 

Hymns,  were  composed  and  used 
by  heretics,  158 ;  were  for- 
bidden, 158  ;  yet  hymns  were 
composed  and  used  in  the 
church,  158,  159 ;  some  writ- 
ers of,  158. 

Hypostases  in  the  one  Christ,  211, 
211,  212. 

Hypostatic  union,  211. 

Ibas,  bishop  of  Edessa,  281,  286, 
299  seq.,  306  seq. ;  drew  back 
from  Nestorianism,  281 ;  re- 
turned to  friendship  with  St. 
Cyril  of  Alexandria,  281  ; 
history  of  his  persecution,  281, 
286,  299  seq.,  309  seq.;  the 
character  of  his  letter  to  Maris, 
heretical  or  orthodox,  299  seq., 
303,  309  seq. ;  himself  and 
letter  approved  by  Pope  Vi- 


gilius,  300  ;  but  condemned  by 
the  fifth  general  council,  300, 
306  seq.,  309  seq.;  question 
of  his  letters  having  been  re- 
ceived at  Chalcedon,  303, 
309  seq. ;  had  been  accused 
by  bishops  and  cast  out  of  his 
see,  310;  was  compelled  to 
anathematize  Nestorius,  his 
writings,  etc.,  310;  his  re- 
puted letter  to  Maris,  was  con- 
demned at  Constantinople, 
315,  344. 

Iberia,  honour  granted  to  its 
bishop,  177. 

Iconoclasts,  533  seq.,  540  seq., 
564,  571 ;  were  orthodox  in 
their  faith  and  practice,  533  n . ; 
as  were  also  their  opponents, 
533  n.  ;  were  anathematized 
with  their  tenets  by  Basil  of 
Ancyra,  533  ;  their  teaching  is 
the  "  worst  of  all  heresies," 
535  ;  their  Conciliabulum,  541 
seq. ;  their  anathemas  issued 
by  the  Conciliabulum,  545 
seq.;  their  zeal  and  persecuting 
fervour,  540  seq.,  556,  564, 
571  seq. ;  their  policy  reversed 
on  the  death  of  Capronymus, 
548  ;  the  essential  weakness  of 
principle  in  the  party,  548  ; 
the  natural  effect  of  their  per- 
secuting, 556,  564,  571 ;  their 
books  are  to  be  given  up  to 
the  Episcopium  at  Constantino- 
ple, 561 ;  any  hiding  their 
books  are  to  be  punished,  561 ; 
their  sacrilege  to  churches, 
monasteries,  etc.,  564,  571 ; 
their  extravagance  and  fop- 
pery in  dress  and  perfumes, 
566,  566;  charges  made 
against  them  to  the  emperor 
and  empress,  571  seq.;  repre- 
sented a  court  and  army  move- 
ment, 575  seq.  ;  its  later  history 
and  decline,  575  seq.  ;  the  Eng- 
lish share  in  the  movement, 
576  seq. 

Icons  of  the  lamb  to  be  replaced 
by  figures  of  the  true  lamb, 
401 ;  how  they  are  venerated, 
533,  572  seq. 

Idol,  heathen  feasts  to,  64;  not 
partaken  in  by  true  Christians, 
64 ;  a  form  of  lapsing,  64 ; 
flesh  offered  to,  92;  question 
about  the  removal  of  some, 
470,  472,  482;  the  emperor 
will  be  petitioned  to  put  the 
remains  away,  482 ;  their 
relation  to  images,  553,  554. 

Idolaters,  how  they  are  to  be  pen- 
anced, 604 ;  received  on  their 
death-bed  if  penitent,  611. 

Idolatry,  a  bar  to  ordination,  23 ; 
invocation  of  angels  is  a  covert 
idolatry,  150. 

Ignorance,  punishable  in  the 
clergy,  377. 

Images,  the  sacred,  are  to  be  vene- 
rated,   533,    541,     551,    552, 


553  seq. ,  572  seq. ;  as  regarded 
by  Christians  according  to 
Basil  of  Ancyra,  533 ;  they  are 
not  regarded  as  idols,  535, 
541,  550,  551  seq.,  572  seq., 
583;  and  pictures  are  com- 
pared with  the  tablets  of  the 
emperors,  535  ;  their  adora- 
tion and  worship  is  anathema- 
tized, 534,  535,  550, 551  seq. ; 
their  emotional  influence,  539, 
540,  583  ;  their  value  for  the 
ignorant  and  simple,  539, 
551  seq.,  583  ;  miracles  con- 
nected with,  540;  helps  to 
realize  the  incarnation,  540; 
their  use  denounced  at  the 
Conciliabulum,  540  seq.,  583  ; 
their  use  defended  by  the 
seventh  ecumenical  council, 
549,  550,  572  seq.;  the  teach- 
ing on  the  subject  in  the  west- 
ern church,  551  seq.,  579  seq.  ; 
and  in  the  eastern,  553  seq.  ; 
question  of  their  worship,  523, 
526  seq.,  584  ;  destroyed,  529. 

Imperial  authority,  the  weight  of, 
230,  283. 

Impropriations,  284  ;  vow  of  King 
Charles  I.,  for  restoration  of, 
284  n. 

Incantation  in  the  name  of  Christ, 
353. 

Incense,  offering  it  by  the  lapsed, 
64;  may  be  presented  at  the 
altar,  594. 

Incest,  how  penanced,  47,  608, 
609. 

Indictions,  calculation  of  dates  by, 
357. 

Individual  responsibility,  82. 

Indulgence,  to  the  lapsed,  24,  63, 
64,  65,  66;  to  the  generally 
penitent,  29,  63,  79,  80  ;  in 
the  bishop's  power,  63,  65,  66, 
280;  to  the  dying,  29,  46,  65, 
74j  79 ;  the  present  Roman 
practice,  80  ;  plenary,  80  n. ; 
a  dangerous  expedient,  84  ; 
to  virgins  and  monks  to  get 
married,  280 ;  its  nature  and 
effect,  280. 

Infamous  persons  (legally)  cannot 
accuse  the  clergy,  504. 

Infants,  unknown,  are  to  be  bap- 
tized, 402,  478 ;  need  the 
sanctification  of  such  a  purifi- 
cation, 402 ;  baptized  by  Dona- 
tists  shall  be  received  on  their 
conversion,  464;  many  were 
rescued  from  the  Moors,  478  ; 
are  to  be  baptized  for  the  re- 
mission of  sins,  496 ;  some 
middle  place  for  the  unbap- 
tized,  497. 

Infidels  received  on  their  death- 
bed if  penitent,  611. 

Insane  not  to  be  ordained,  46. 

Intercession  of  saints,  how  asked 
and  expected,  533,  534,  541, 
647,  552,  553. 

Interdict,  early  traces  of  it,  558. 

Interest  on  church  property,  69. 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


661 


Irregularities  in  ordination,  22,  23, 

24,  46. 
Isaiah  xxv.  8  [amended],  205  n. 
Isidore  Mercator,  his  collections, 

xxxiv. 

Jacob,  reader,  a  case  of  discipline, 
614. 

Jerusalem,  the  honor  and  position 
of  its  bishop,  17,  46,  47,  382  ; 
is  jElia  in  the  7th  Nicene 
canon,  17 ;  excursus  od  the 
rise  of  its  patriarchate,  1,  18, 
19  ;  history  of  the  city  and 
see,  17,  18  ;  was  iElia  Capito- 
lina,  17 ;  ecclesiastically  under 
Caesarea,  46 ;  its  relation  to 
Antioch,  19,  266,  382;  juris- 
diction of  its  bishop  is  defined 
at  Chalcedon,  266 ;  its  see 
ranked  as  the  fifth,  382. 

Jerusalem,  excursus  on  the  rise 
of  the  patriarchate,  18. 

Jesus  Christ,  our  Lord,  the  Son  of 
God,  150,  173,  175,  176. 
[Christ,  and  Word  of  God.] 

Jews,  their  Easter  reckoning  to  be 
avoided,  54  seq.,  108,  594; 
it  is  not  lawful  to  feast  with 
them,  151,  370;  or  to  receive 
portions  from  their  feasts, 
151,  598;  or  to  receive 
unleavened  bread  from  them, 
151,  370,  598;  or  to  be  par- 
takers of  their  impiety,  151 ; 
or  to  give  a  child  in  marriage 
to,  278 ;  or  to  have  any 
friendly  or  other  intercourse, 
370 ;  cannot  accuse  the  clergy, 
504 ;  their  pretences  to  con- 
version to  Christianity,  561 ; 
must  become  real  Christians  or 
remain  Jews,  561 ;  shall  not 
purchase  or  possess  a  slave, 
561 ;  if  Christians,  they  must 
keep  aloof  from  Jews,  561 ; 
good  picture  of  the  Jews  hos- 
tile to  the  faith,  561 ;  and  of 
the  Jews  who  sincerely  em- 
brace Christianity,  561,  561  ; 
those  who  turn  Jews  may  be 
received  on  their  death-bed  if 
penitent,  611. 

John  Baptist,  legend  of,  601  n. 

John,  Bp.  of  Antioch,  his  con- 
ciliabulum,  226  seq. ;  friend 
of  Nestorius,  226 ;  he  and  his 
followers  were  barely  hereti- 
cal, 226. 

John  of  Antioch,  Scholasticus, 
collector  of  canons,  xxx. 

Josh.  xxiv.  14,  527. 

Judaizers,  133. 

Judaizing  forbidden  on  pain  of 
anathema  from  Christ,  148. 

Judges,  credit  to  be  given  to  their 
honesty.  449. 

Judgment  must  be  impartial  even 
against  bishops,  183,  449; 
Origenistic  ideas  of  the  final 
judgment,  319  ;  how  it  was 
sometimes  obtained,  449;  "all 
matters  should  be   settled  in 


the  places  where  they  arise," 
510. 

Julian,  Bp.  of  Vazarita,  ordained 
irregularly,  468 ;  was  cen- 
sured, and  had  a  canon  made 
against  the  irregularity,  468. 

Julius,  Bp.  of  Rome,  why  an 
appeal  allowed  to  him,  417 ; 
petitions  should  be  examined 
and  sent  to  court  through  him, 
423;  letter  to,  from  the 
Cotincil  of  Sardica,  but  doubt- 
ful, 434. 

Jurisdiction,  Rome's,  over  suburbi- 
can  churches,  1,  16  seq.  ;  of 
Roman  bishop  has  occasioned 
much  controversy,  16 ;  of 
Alexandria  over  Egypt, 
Libya  and  Pentapolis,  15, 15, 
16  ;  frequent  questions  as  be- 
tween dioceses,  etc.,  280. 

Jurisprudence  as  studied  by  the 
Greeks  and  Romans,  xxix. 

Justinian,  his  time,  43 ;  called  the 
Fifth  general  council,  299, 
302;  prescribed  some  orders 
of  procedure,  300,  302-303; 
invited  Pope  Vigilius  to  the 
council,  300,  303;  his  con- 
fession of  faith,  303,  314; 
ordered  Vigilius's  name  to  be 
erased  from  the  diptychs, 
305 ;  his  legal  code,  xxix,  xxx. 

Justinianopolis  on  the  Hellespont, 
383  ;  succeeds  to  the  jurisdic- 
tion of  Constantinople  in 
Hellespont,  383,  383 ;  placed 
above  Cyzicus,  383. 

Juvenal,  Bp.  of  Jerusalem,  18,  19, 
192,  219,  223,  266  ;  his  juris- 
diction is  defined,  266. 

Kenosis  in  Christ's  Incarnation, 
211,  212,  252. 

Kenoticism,  174  n.,  212. 

2  Kings  xviii.  45,  54  ;  xxi.  5,  6, 
395. 

King,  no  one  shall  insult  king  or 
ruler,  599;  under  penalties  to 
cleric  or  layman,  599. 

"  Kingdom  (whose)  shall  have  no 
end,"  history  of  the  clause, 
163. 

Kiss  of  peace,  136  ;  to  the  bishop, 
136;  to  the  laity,  to  each 
other,  136. 

Kneelers,  a  class  of  penitents,  26, 
29 ;  may  be  degraded  to  be 
hearers,  81 ;  a  class  preparing 
for  baptism,  153. 

Kneeling  in  prayer,  42,  47,  403 ; 
forbidden  at  certain  seasons, 
42,  403 ;  different  practices  at 
these  seasons,  42 ;  forbidden 
upon  the  Sabbath,  133 ;  in 
honour  of  the  Lord's  resur- 
rection, it  is  not  allowed  on 
Sundays,  403  ;  the  time  fixed 
for  its  ceasing  and  recom- 
mencing, 403. 

Knowledge  of  crime  and  conceal- 
ing it  make  one  guilty  of  it 
all,  608. 


Kyradium,  woman,  case  of  disci- 
pline, 614. 

Labourers  (Koiriarai),  144 ;  history 
of  their  office,  144. 

Laity,  must  be  heard  when  they 
ask  to  have  a  bishop,  420  ; 
may  not  choose  their  parish 
priest,  50,  131;  may  appeal 
to  the  synod  when  excom- 
municated, 111;  carry  com- 
mendatory letters,  112,  152 ; 
their  place  and  share  in 
church  music,  132,  133 ;  may 
not  be  stirred  up  by  slander- 
ous accusations  of  persons, 
183. 

Lamb  of  God  is  to  be  represented 
by  truly  human  figures,  401 ; 
the  change  is  for  the  sake  of 
greater  reality,  401 ;  the  true 
object  of  the  pictorial  symbols 
and  figures,  401,  401. 

Laodicea  in  Phrygia  Pacatiana, 
synod  at,  122  seq. ;  the  locality 
fixed  and  distinguished,  124  ; 
its  date  doubtful  between  343 
a.d.  and  381  a.d.,  124. 

Lapsed  in  persecution,  19,  47,  62, 
63,  598,  611 ;  Cathari  refused 
to  accept  them  on  repentance, 
19,  20;  church  dealt  with 
them  in  charity,  19,  598,  611 ; 
forbidden  to  be  ordained,  24 ; 
to  be  deposed  if  irregularly 
ordained,  24 ;  those  who  fell 
in  the  time  of  Licinius  are  to 
be  mercifully  dealt  with,  24, 
28 ;  those  who  fell  without 
necessity  to  be  mercifully 
dealt  with,  24,  64;  the  penal- 
ties upon  the  lapsed,  24,  28, 
63,  64,  65  ;  how  lapsed  cate- 
chumens are  to  be  disciplined, 
31 ;  how  generally  to  be  dealt 
with,  47,  64;  through  lust, 
50 ;  recently  discovered  libelli 
of  the  lapsed,  62 ;  presbyters 
and  deacons,  63,  598;  those 
by  evident  violence,  64:  those 
owing  to  threats  alone,  65 ; 
indulgence  to  present  repent- 
ance, 65 ;  by  eating  at  idol 
feasts,  64,  65 ;  by  sacrificing 
in  honour  of  gods,  64 ;  to  be 
received  if  penitent  on  their 
death-bed,  611. 

Latrocinium  at  Ephesus,  247 ;  its 
acts  were  read  at  Chalcedon, 
247,  288. 

Lawr,  Roman  civil,  xxix ;  canon, 
xxix  ;  excursus  on  the  history 
of  the  Roman,  and  its  relation 
to  the  canon,  xxix  seq.  ; 
Theodosian  Code,  xxx  ;  pan- 
dects, xxx ;  digest,  xxx, 
xxxi;  fifty  decisions,  xxx; 
Institutes,  xxx,  xxxi ;  novels, 
xxx,  xxxi ;  corpus  juris 
chilis,  xxx ;  corpus  juris 
canonici,  xxx ;  basilica, 
xxxi  seq.  ;  epanagoge,  xxxi ; 
prochiron,  xxxi. 


6itt 


INDEX    OF   SUBJECTS 


Laws,  the  ecclesiastical,  109;  con- 
trary to  the  laws  of  the 
church,  276;  students  of  civil 
laws  must  not  adopt  the  cus- 
toms of  the  gentiles,  397 ;  or 
be  induced  to  go  to  the 
theatre,  397 ;  or  to  keep 
cylestras,  397,  397  ;  or  to 
wear  unusual  clothing,  397. 

Layman,  not  disciplined  for  usury, 
38  ;  though  a  usurer,  he  may  be 
ordained,  38;  lapsed  through 
violence  may  be  ordained,  64; 
who  has  adulterous  wife  can- 
not be  ordained,  82 ;  must 
observe  the  Nicsean  Easter  on 
pain  of  excommunication, 
108,  108  ;  question  of  his  part 
in  episcopal  elections,  131 ; 
must  not  bathe  with  women, 
149,  399 ;  must  not  club  to- 
gether for  drinking  entertain- 
ments, 157;  one  setting  aside 
the  decrees  of  Ephesus  shall 
be  excommunicated,  230 ; 
holding  or  teaching  contrary 
to  the"Nicene  faith  shall  be 
anathematized,  231 ;  may  be 
founder  or  benefactor  of  any 
institution,  274  ;  shall  have  his 
character  investigated  if  he 
bring  a  charge  against  the 
clergy,  283;  excommunicated, 
if  he  has  had  intercourse  with 
a  nun,  364;  guilty  of  death 
for  ravishing  a  nun,  364  ;  shall 
have  no  dealings  with  Jews 
on  pain  of  excommunication, 
370;  the  rank  of  a  deposed 
and  unrepenting  cleric,  375 ; 
may  not  communicate  himself 
in  the  presence  of  bishop, 
presbyter  or  deacon,  392; 
penalty  for  doing  it,  ' '  cut  off 
for  one  week,"  etc.,  392; 
shall  not  assume  the  duty  of 
teaching  which  is  clerical, 
394;  question  in  how  far  this 
is  limited,  394 ;  is  not  per- 
mitted to  enter  the  sanctuary, 
396;  by  tradition  the  emperor 
may  enter  to  present  his  gifts, 
396 ;  absence  from  church 
brings  him  under  penance, 
400,  426  ;  if  excommunicated 
cannot  be  received  in  another 
city,  594;  unless  he  have 
letters  commendatory,  594 ; 
for  self-mutilation  will  be  ex- 
communicated for  three  years, 
665 ;  for  putting  away  his 
wife  and  marrying,  shall  be 
excommunicated,  597 ;  for 
marrying  one  divorced  from 
another  man  shall  be  excom- 
municated, 597 ;  convicted  of 
fornication,  adultery  or  any 
forbidden  action  shall  not  be 
ordained,  598  ;  shall  not  eat 
flesh  with  the  blood,  or  man- 
gled, or  naturally  died,  598; 
shall  not  enter  a  Jewish  syna- 
gogue  to    pray,    598 ;     or    a 


heretical  meeting  to  pray, 
598 ;  if  in  a  contest  he  kills 
one  with  one  blow,  let  him  be 
excommunicated,  598 ;  shall 
observe  the  fasts,  unless  hin- 
dered by  infirmity,  598 ;  can 
only  be  excommunicated, 
604. 

Lector.     [See  Reader.] 

Lent,  the  Quadrigesimal  fast  of 
Easter,  598;  preparatory  to 
Easter,  13,  598;  the  ancient 
discipline  of,  25,  155,  156  ;  the 
time  for  instructing  the  cate- 
chumens, 153 ;  celebrations  to 
be  only  upon  Saturday  and 
Sunday  in  Lent,  155  ;  its  fast 
must  not  be  broken  on  Maundy 
Thursday,  155,  378 ;  is  not 
the  time  for  martyr  nativities, 
156 ;  is  unsuitable  for  saints' 
days,  156  ;  times  in,  for  the 
liturgy  of  the  presanctified, 
389 ;  the  fast  of,  389 ;  its 
motive  and  spirit,  156 ;  mar- 
riages and  birthday  feasts  are 
forbidden  in,  156  ;  its  observ- 
ances, 389,  391 ;  some  curi- 
ous customs  in  Armenia  for- 
bidden, 391. 

Leo,  tome  of  Pope,  2,  244,  254 
seq.,  345  ;  in  the  Easter  ques- 
tion, 56  ;  the  tome  is  exam- 
ined and  approved,  244,  245, 
249  ;  later  questions  upon  the 
authority  and  purpose  of  the 
tome,  245,  246  ;  text  of  the 
tome,  254  seq  ;  tome  was  re- 
ceived again  and  approved, 
254  seq.,  259  ;  passed  sentence 
of  degradation  on  Dioscorus, 
259,  260  ;  his  action  was  con- 
firmed by  the  synod,  260  ; 
tome  approved  at  III.  Con- 
stantinople, 345. 

Leo  III.  Pope,  resisted  the  inser- 
tion of  the  filioque,  166,  167. 

Leontius,  forced  into  the  episco- 
pate, 8  n.  ;  self-mutilated,  8  n. 

Lepers,  xenon  for,  276. 

Lessons  were  read  to  relieve  the 
psalmody,  133,  138. 

Letters  canonical,  112,  152  ;  in  the 
AVest  were  called /create,  112, 
453. 

Letters  commendatory,  112.  152, 
276,  276,  278,  453,  453,  594, 
596 ;  with  what  symbol 
marked,  112  ;  why  not  given 
to  the  travelling  poor,  276; 
necessary  for  foreign  bishops 
and  clergy,  596. 

Letters  of  communion,  112,  152. 

Letters  dimissory,  112,  374,  453, 
453. 

Letters  pacifical.  111,  112,  276, 
276,  453 ;  given  to  the  poor 
when  travelling,  276. 

Letters,  pragmatic,  277,  383. 

Letters,  false  and  surreptitiously 
obtained,  596. 

Levites,  their  age  for  ordination, 
84. 


Lex  talionis  upon  bishops,  558. 

Libelli  of  the  lapsed,  62. 

Libya,  its  ancient  custom  to  pre- 
vail, 14;  interpretation  of  the 
canonical  grant,  14 ;  had  its 
own  metropolitan,  16  ;  its 
bishops  caused  scandal,  370. 

Licinius,  his  tyranny,  24 ;  as  rep- 
resentative of  heathenism,  28  ; 
his  contest  with  Constantine, 
28  ;  compelled  his  soldiers  to 
apostatize,  28. 

Lictores,  145. 

Litem  format®,  112,  152,  453,  495, 
495.  [See  Letters  Canon- 
ical.] 

Liturgy  of  S.  Mark,  279. 

Living  thing  shall  not  be  offered 
on  the  Altar,  594. 

Logos,  his  relation  to  the  Father,  4. 

Logos  and  the  incarnation.  [See 
Word  of  God.] 

London,  the  see  second  to  Canter- 
bury, 18. 

S.  Luke  xviii.  29,  366  n. 

Lord's  Day,  standing  in  prayer, 
42 ;  Eustathiaiis  fasted  on  it, 
91,  100;  a  free  day,  91;  fast- 
ing on  it  forbidden  by  canon 
at  Gangra,  99,  100 ;  a  day  of 
joy  and  thanks,  100  ;  feast  of 
our  Lord's  resurrection,  100; 
Christians  rest  on  it  as  Chris- 
tians, 148, 149,  389,  391  ;  rest 
on  the  day,  if  they  can,  148, 
149  ;  not  a  day  for  fasting, 
598. 

Lorenzo,  St.,  his  church  in  Rome, 
25. 

Lust  prevented  in  act  by  God's 
grace,  81. 

Lustrations,  74. 

Luther  opposed  Calvin's  views  on 
usury,  37  ,  on  marriage,  92  n. 

Lutheran  teaching  on  the  Euchar- 
ist, 39. 

Maffei,  his  discovery  of  manu- 
scripts, 413,  434. 

Magic  a  bar  to  ordination,  23. 

Magician,  the  definition  of,  151  ; 
presbyters  and  clergy  shall  not 
be,  151. 

fj.aKp6(mKo$,  Eusebian  formula,  414. 

Mai.  i.  7,  13,  94. 

Man,  may  not  sleep  in  a  monastery 
of  women,  387 ;  shall  not 
dress  as  a  woman,  or  a  woman 
as  a  man,  393  ;  his  safety  and 
comfort  come  before  canon 
law,  403  ;  who  has  corrupted 
a  woman,  shall  keep  her,  but 
be  under  penance,  606  ;  tak- 
ing a  man's  wife  and  marrying 
another,  is  adulterer  with  the 
first,  607 ;  abusing  himself 
with  mankind  or  a  beast,  how 
penanced,  608. 

Man  shall  not  many  his  mother-in- 
law,  or  his  sister,  609. 

March,  full  assembly  on  the  first 
of,  is  to  be  discontinued,  393, 
394. 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


663 


Mark,  St.,  x.  29,  266  n. 

Marriage,  incestuous,  47  ;  with  in- 
fidels forbidden,  49,  50;  sec- 
ond, or  third,  excursus  on, 
72  seq.,  82,  125  ;  successive 
marriages  lawful,  72, 125  ;  un- 
lawful, 75,  362,  363;  of  a 
priest,  how  disciplined,  79, 
51  seq.,  362,  363,  364;  ques- 
tion of  prohibited  degrees,  79, 
80,  606  ;  with  deceased  wife's 
sister,  79,  80  ;  many  marriages 
or  polygamy,  80;  of  clergy 
allowed  in  eastern  church, 
83,   93,    120,    362,   363,    363, 

364  seq. ;  abhorrence  of,  by 
heretics,  91,  92,  93,  95  ;  if  it 
leaves  no  hope  of  salvation, 
91;oughtnot  to  be  condemned, 
92,  92,  95;  feeling  upon  the 
question  in  the  early  church, 
92,  365  ;  scripture  teaching  on 
marriage  misapprehended,  92 ; 
secret,  or  fornication,  125 ; 
with  heretics  forbidden,  129, 
149  ;  is  not  to  be  celebrated  in 
Lent,  156 ;  Christians  must  not 
join  in  the  wanton  dances, 
156  ;  may  have  modest  dinner 
or  breakfast,  156 ;  no  bar  to 
ordination,  365  ;  clergy  must 
leave  when  the  games  begin, 
378;  those  in  second  marriage 
must  separate  before  a  date, 
362  ;  some  are  bars  to  ordina- 
tion or  advancement,  362, 
363,  363,  595 ;  excursus  on 
the   marriage   of   the    clergy, 

365  seq. ;  of  the  clergy  allowed 
by  the  Nestorians  and  the  Eng- 
lish church,  365 ;  questions 
about  the  nullity  of  clerical 
marriages,  367  ;  illegitimate 
must  be  dissolved,  377  ;  list  of 
prohibited  degrees,  390,  391, 
608,  609;  penalty  due  to  such 
acts,  391 ;  penalty,  separation 
and  seven  years'  penance,  391 ; 
not  to  be  between  the  orthodox 
and  heretical,  397, 397 ;  if  it  has 
already  taken  place  it  is  null, 
397 ;  of  unbelievers  need  not 
be  dissolved  if  one  be  convert- 
ed and  the  other  not,  397  ; 
the  rights  of  soldier  long  ab- 
sent and  finds  his  wife  mar- 
ried, 404,  606;  the  question 
defined  in  such  cases  of  igno- 
rance, 404,  606 ;  refused  to 
those  who  put  away  wife  or 
husband,  493,  494;  these  who 
refuse  to  comply  with  this  are 
put  under  penance,  493  ;  but 
it  is  best  that  they  be  recon- 
ciled to  each  other,  493  ;  mar- 
riage to  two  sisters  is  a  bar  to 
ordination,  595 ;  also  to  a 
niece  is  a  bar,  595  ;  those  who 
have  made  two  or  three  are 
under  penance,  604 ;  forbid- 
den to  a  man  with  two  sisters, 
606,  608,  609;  and  to  a 
woman   with    two    brothers, 


606 ;  and  to  a  man  with  his 
brother's  wife,  606 ;  many 
nice  questions  as  to  marriage 
relation,  604  seq. ;  marriage 
is  not  to  be  abhorred,  597  ;  a 
third  is  better  than  fornica- 
tion, 607  ;  forbidden  to  marry 
a  son's  wife,  609. 

Married  man  is  guilty  of  fornica- 
tion and  so  penanced,  606 ; 
woman  is  guilty  of  adultery 
and  so  penanced,  606. 

Martyrs,  services  in  honor  of,  91, 
100,  129  ;  services  condemned 
by  the  Eustathians,  91,  100, 
100 ;  commemoration  of  the, 
100 ;  heretical  pseudo-martyrs, 
129  ;  some  truly  such  though 
in  heresy,  129  ;  of  Christ  and 
false  martyrs,  150,  482  ;  false 
are  not  to  be  gone  after  on  pain 
of  anathema,  150,  482 ;  of 
the  Montanist  in  Phrygia,  150  ; 
the  cultus  of,  151  ;  their  nativ- 
ities are  not  to  be  celebrated  in- 
Lent,  156 ;  their  commemora- 
tions are  to  be  made  on  Satur- 
days and  Sundays,  156  ;  pub- 
lic readings  upon  in  church, 
394;  false  accounts  of  them 
are  to  be  burned,  394,  482; 
those  who  use  or  accept  them 
as  true  are  anathematized, 
393  ;  passions  read  on  the 
commemoration  day,  463 ; 
celebration  of  their  natal  days, 
473. 

Martyry,  or  Martyrs'  chapel,  100, 
129,  272,  273,  275. 

Masks  of  no  kind  shall  be  worn, 
393. 

Mathematician,  definition  of,  151  ; 
priesthood  or  clergy  shall  not 
be  a,  151. 

Mathematics  is  not  forbidden  to 
the  clergy,  151. 

Matt,  St.,  iv.  10,  527  ;  v.  9,  530  ; 
xv.  4-6,  99  ;  xix.  12,  92  ;  xix. 
29,  366  n. 

Mattins,  134. 

Maundy  Thursday,  a  fast  day  in 
lent,  155,  389,  389  seq.,  461, 
598  ;  made  by  some  a  partial 
break  in  the  lenten  fast,  156, 
461 ;  associated  with  holy 
communion,  461 ;  the  prepar- 
ation, 598. 

Maximus,  bishop  of  Antioch,  his 
jurisdiction  is  defined,  19,  248, 
266. 

Maximus  the  Cynic,  Bp.  of  Con- 
stantinople, 177,  179,  180,  186  ; 
is  declared  to  be  no  bishop, 
179,  180 ;  all  his  acts  are  de- 
clared void  and  invalid,  179; 
those  ordained  by  him  are  de- 
clared to  be  in  no  order  of  the 
clergy,  179. 

Maximus,  a  case  of  discipline,  614. 

Meat  is  forbidden  to  be  cooked  in 
the  sanctuary,  407. 

Melancthon  opposed  Calvin  on  the 
question  of  usury,  37. 


Meletius,  Bp.  of  Antioch,  12,  34, 
162,  177,  181,  182  ;  presided  at 
the  council  of  Constantinople, 
162 ;  when  president,  he  was 
not  in  communion  with  Rome, 
162  ;  died  while  the  council  was 
in  session,  162  ;  was  canonized 
by  the  pope,  162,  162  n. ;  ac- 
cepted a  western  tome,  182. 

Meletius,  Bp.  of  Lycopolis,  53 ; 
condemned  at  Nicsea,  53,  54. 

Memnon,  Bp.  of  Ephesus,  an  ob- 
ject of  attack  by  the  Nesto- 
rians, 226-8,  238,  239. 

Memorials  of  martyrs  set  up,  482 ; 
should  be  inquired  into  as  to 
their  true  character,  482. 

Men,  on  pretence  of  ascetism,  as- 
sume female  attire,  91,  97,  98. 

Mennas,  question  of  his  letter  to 
Pope  Vigilius,  301. 

Menstruous  women,  restrictions 
upon,  600. 

Metropolis  in  Africa,  502. 

Milk  is  not  to  be  used  in  the  eu- 
charist,  594. 

Miracles,  how  they  were  worked 
by  Christ,  21 5  seq. 

Miscarriage,  causing,  73. 

Missa  Catechumenoriim,  32,  145. 

Missa  Fidelium,  32,  145. 

Missa  Prcesanctificatorum,  155,  156, 
389  seq. ;  was  on  ordinary  days 
in  Lent,  155,  389;  suitable  for 
days  of  penitence  and  mourn- 
ing, 155,  156. 

Monasteries,  how  visited,  49;  may 
not  elect  their  abbot,  50 ;  for 
sisters,  widows,  and  deacon- 
esses, 50,  130 ;  widows  held 
office  in,  130,  388  ;  once  con- 
secrated cannot  be  secularized, 
284,  284  seq.,  388;  conse- 
crated with  the  consent  of  the 
bishop,  284,  388;  desecration 
exposes  the  agents  to  ecclesias- 
tical penalties,  284;  all  their 
goods  and  possessions  shall 
remain  theirs,  388 ;  alienation 
of  their  property  is  null,  388  ; 
cannot  be  given  to  seculars, 
388 ;  shall  not  have  their  su- 
perior from  a  foreign  mon- 
astery, 481 ;  were  polluted  and 
destroyed  under  Copronymus, 
547. 

Monastic  life  is  one  of  penitence, 
381 ;  may  be  entered  by  any 
one,  386;  must  be  accepted 
sincerely,  386 ;  may  not  be 
forbidden  to  any  sincere  per- 
son, 386  ;  an  escape  from  the 
troublous  surgings  of  life, 
386. 

Monasticism,  its  rise,  134;  intro- 
duced into  Antioch  c.  350  a. d., 
134. 

Mother,  may  live  with  her  son  a 
clergyman,  46 ;  neglecting  her 
child  is  a  murderer,  606 ;  yet 
there  may  be  extenuations, 
608. 

Mourners,  their  place,  602. 


664 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


Murderer,  his  penance,  74,  608, 
611;  guilty  in  different  ways 
and  measures,  605,  606,  608  ; 
from  administering  a  pfiUtrum, 
605  ;  penanced  for  involuntary 
murder,  605,  611 ;  question 
if  a  soldier  in  war  is,  605 ;  the 
giving  a  fatal  blow  makes  the 
murderer,  607. 

Musseus,  his  ordinations  are  to  be 
recognized,  431 ;  may  not  be 
accounted  bishop,  432,  may 
be  received  in  lay  communion, 
432. 

Mutilation  as  a  bar  to  the  ministry, 
8.     [See  Castration.] 

Narthex,  the  place  of  the  hearers, 
24,  29 ;  its  position  in  the 
church  building,  26. 

Nave,  part  of  the  church,  26. 

Neale,  J.  M.,  his  argument  against 
the  second  Nicene  council,  524. 

Necessity  as  above  canon  law, 
403. 

Nectarius  Patriarch  of  Constanti- 
nople, 27,  126,  186,  189,  286, 
512,  513;  his  action  regarding 
the  public  penitentiary,  27,  27 
n.  ;  president  of  the  second 
ecumenical  synod,  126  ;  pres- 
ident of  the  council,  394  a.d., 
511  seq. 

Neocsesarea,  its  council,  78  seq. ;  its 
canons,  79  seq. 

Neophyte  must  be  deliberately  in- 
structed, 10,  46  ;  examples  of 
short  probation,  10 ;  must 
have  Scripture  knowledge  be- 
fore ordination,  46  ;  if  convict- 
ed, is  to  be  deposed,  46. 

Nice  I.  the  first  ecumenical 
Council,  325  a.d.,  xii  n., 
lseq.,  78,  124;  its  acts  are 
lost,  2,  2  n.;  its  canons,  8  seq. ; 
calls  itself  "the  great  synod," 
10,  11;  calls  itself  "  the  great 
and  holy  synod,"  19,  31,  32, 
36,  38, 53  ;  its  reasons  for  for- 
bidding translations,  32,  33  ; 
teaching  deduced  from  canon, 
xviii,  39 ;  doubtful  reading 
in  canon  xix,  40  ;  the  synodal 
letter,  53  seq.  ;  the  synod's 
objects  and  resolutions,  53  seq. , 
359  seq.;  its  decrees  confirmed 
at  Antioch,  108 ;  one  chief 
topic  was  Easter,  108 ;  deci- 
sion on  commendatory  letters, 
112  ;  called  the  "  Three  hun- 
dred and  eighteen  Fathers  as- 
sembled at  Nice,"  172,  231, 
244,  249,  344,  359;  decrees 
confirmed,  231,  244,  441 ;  its 
canons,  excursus  on  their 
number,  1,  43  seq.  ;  number 
only  twenty,  43  seq.  ;  many 
attributed,  43  seq.  ;  direct  the 
privileges  of  the  diocese  of  An- 
tioch, 176;  its  canons  con- 
firmed at  Constantinople,  176, 
177,  244  ;  its  faith  confirmed 
at    Ephesus,   231,    231,    232, 


244 ;  one  holding  or  teaching 
another  faith  is  to  be  deposed 
or  anathematized,  231,  231, 
232  ;  canons  confirmed  at 
quinisext  council,  361 ;  the 
decrees  are  in  doubt  at  coun- 
cil in  Carthage,  442,  443, 
507  ;  orders  were  given  to  ex- 
amine the  original  decrees  and 
report,  442,  443,  507,  508, 
509 ;  confirmation  given  at 
Carthage  to  the  Nicene  de- 
crees, 443,  444,  509 ;  true 
copy  of  the  proceedings  was 
sent  by  Cyril  of  Alexandria, 
508 ;  true  copy  of  the  Canons 
was  sent  by  Atticus  of  Con- 
stantinople, 508,  509 ;  the 
authority  that  summoned  it, 
xii  n. 
Nice  II.  The  Seventh  Ecumeni- 
cal Council,  787  a.d.,  521  seq. ; 
the  second  ecumenical  council 
of,  523  seq.  ;  its  ecumenicity, 
524  seq.  ;  Gibbon's  erroneous 
statement  regarding  it,  523  ; 
presided  over  by  Tarasius,  523 ; 
council  was  truly  ecumenical, 
523,  524  seq.,  531,  575  seq.  ; 
called  by  the  Roman  rulers, 
Constantine  and  Irene,  523, 
540,  549;  had  the  patriarchates 
represented  in  it,  523  ;  had  its 
decrees  unanimously  adopted 
by  the  350  bishops  present, 
523  ;  decrees  were  at  once  re- 
ceived in  the  four  eastern 
patriarchates,  524  ;  and  at  once 
accepted  at  Rome,  524 ;  have 
been  almost  universally  re- 
ceived since,  524  ;  it  has  been 
accepted  by  some  English 
teachers,  524  ;  but  is  usually 
rejected  in  the  Anglican 
schools  of  theology,  524  seq.  ; 
Neale's  opinion  criticized,  524, 
525 ;  Palmer's  opinion  criti- 
cized, 525,  526;  what  the  coun- 
cil decreed,  526  seq.  ;  venera- 
tion (wpo<TKvvri<ns)  but  not 
AaTpda  to  images,  526  ;  argu- 
ment upon  the  ideas  in  wor- 
ship, 527,  528  ;  the  divine 
Sacra,  529;  the  imperial  sa- 
cra, 530  seq.;  the  question  of 
Images,  pictures,  and  paint- 
ings discussed,  536  seq.  ;  evi- 
dence from  the  fathers  in  fa- 
vour of  pictures,  539  seq.; 
confession  of  their  faith,  541 ; 
excursus  on  the  conciliabu- 
lum,  546  seq.  ;  spirit  of  the  7th 
ecumenical  council  is  excellent 
and  reforming,  555;  the  seventh 
ecumenical  council  is  most 
valuable,  548,  555  ;  it  reversed 
the  decrees  of  the  conciliabu- 
lum,  548  ;  decree  of  the  coun- 
cil, 549  seq.  ;  excursus  on  the 
present  teaching  in  East  and 
West  on  the  subject,  551  ;  the 
Canons  of  the  seventh  ecu- 
menical council,  555-70 ;  let- 


ter of  the  synod  to  the  emper- 
or and  empress,  571  ;  excursus 
on  the  reception  of  the  sev- 
enth council,  575  seq.  ;  its  ecu- 
menicity denied  in  the  Caroline 
Books,  582  ;  the  question  of 
its  being  condemned  by  coun- 
cil of  Frankfort,  583-6 ;  it 
was  accepted  as  ecumenical  by 
the  eighth  and  following  coun- 
cils, 586  seq.  ;  also  by  the 
council  of  Lyons,  587  ;  and 
by  the  council  of  Florence, 
587  ;  its  relation  to  the  Roman 
see,  xiv. 

Nicene  Creed,  1,  3, 172  ;  given  by 
Cyril,  202  seq.  ;  given  by  Pope 
Agatho,  340 ;  read  at  Car- 
thage, 443,  509. 

Nicene  Faith  of  Nice  I.  is  con- 
firmed at  Constantinople,  381 
A.D.,  172;  statement  of  the- 
ological points  at  issue,  173  ; 
confirmed  at  Ephesus,  431 
a.d.,  231;  those  offering  a 
different  faith  are  to  be  de- 
posed or  anathematized,  231; 
contains  sufficient,  251,  253  ; 
confirmed  at  Chalcedon,  251, 
253,  261,  262,  263  ;  confirmed 
at  III.  Constantinople,  344; 
confirmed  at  the  quinisext, 
359. 

Nocturus,  134. 

Nones,  service  at,  134;  their  ori- 
gin, 134. 

Numidia,  its  archives  and  matric- 
ula  to  be  kept  at  Constantina, 
484. 

Oath,  those  taking  heathen,  are  to 
be  excommunicated,  405 ;  that 
a  man  will  not  receive  ordina- 
tion, 605  ;  cases  of  rash  oaths, 
605,  606. 

CEconomm.     [See  Steward.] 

Offices  said  in  church,  49 ;  choir, 
excursus  on,  134,  135. 

Oil  for  the  lamps  may  be  presented 
at  the  altar,  594 ;  stolen  from 
the  holy  church  shall  be  re- 
stored with  a  fifth  more,  598. 

Old  woman  may  live  with  clergy, 
46. 

Omophorivn,  143. 

Onlv  Begotten,  is  Jesus  alone,  213, 
"214. 

Orarium  or  stole,  forbidden  to  the 
subdeacon,  140, 140,  142  ;  was 
worn  by  deacon  and  presby- 
ter, 142  seq.  ;  its  origin  and 
use,  142  ;  how  worn  by  differ- 
ent orders,  143  ;  its  use  forbid- 
den to  the  readers  and  singers, 
143. 

Oratories,  why  they  are  not  conse- 
crated, 560  ;  they  have  avTiu.4v 
ma  or  superaltars,  560  ;  cler- 
gy from  another  diocese  shall 
not  find  refuge  in  them,  562; 
not  be  begun  without  the 
money  to  finish  them,  566 ; 
the  building  to  be  forbidden 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


665 


by  the  bishop,  if  there  are  no 
means,  566;  often  commenced 
in  a  fever  of  discontent,  566. 

Order,  ecclesiastical,  some  wish  to 
confuse  and  overturn,  183. 

Ordines,  143,  144  seq. 

Oriens,  civil  province  of,  16 ;  ec- 
clesiastical province  had  its 
metropolitan,  16. 

Origen,  was  condemned  by  the 
fifth  general  council,  314, 
359,  361 ;  question  as  to  this 
condemnation  considered,  314; 
question  decided  affirmatively, 
314 ;  excursus  on  the  fifteen 
anathemas  against  him,  316 
seq.  ;  the  anathemas  fifteen 
against  Origen,  318  seq.  ;  the 
anathematisms  of  the  Emperor 
Justinian  against  him,  320. 

Orthodox  party  at  Antioch,  181, 
181,  182. 

Pacifical  letters,  111,  112. 

Pagan  committing  lewdness  with 
a  deaconess,  607 ;  if  he  pro- 
fessed the  faith,  and  then  draws 
back,  607 ;  assuming  the  name 
and  reproaching  Christ,  607. 

Paintings  of  a  lascivious  nature  are 
forbidden,  407. 

Pallium  of  wool  for  the  bishop, 
142,  143. 

Pandects,  the  Roman,  xxx. 

Panuph,  deacon,  a  case  of  disci- 
pline, 614. 

Papal  authority,  if  council  of 
Gangra  under,  90. 

Papal  claims  to  jurisdiction,  15, 
16 ;  decisions  preceding  coun- 
cils, xiv. 

Paphnutius,  his  address  on  celi- 
bacy of  the  clergy,  51,  52. 

Paris  convention  supposed  to  have 
been  held,  825  a.d.,  586;  the 
whole  question  is  doubtful, 
586. 

Parish,  the  ancient  name  for 
diocese,  35 ;  right  of  the 
parish  (diocese),  35,  42 ;  uni- 
formity in  worship  in,  42 ;  to 
be  cared  for  by  its  bishop, 
112,  113  ;  shall  remain  sub- 
ject to  its  bishop,  377 ;  if  it 
has  been  ministered  by  him  for 
thirty  years,  377 ;  ecclesiasti- 
cal shall  follow  the  political 
and  municipal  example  in  new 
cities,  280 ;  frequent  questions 
as  to  jurisdictions,  280  ;  vil- 
lage or  rural,  shall  be  subject 
to  its  present  bishop,  280, 280  ; 
shall  continue  subject  if  there 
has  been  a  peaceable  and  con- 
tinuous governoring  of  thirty 
years,  280,  280 ;  may  appeal 
to  the  synod  of  the  province 
if  the  period  be  less  than  thirty 
years,  280,  280  ;  may  hence 
appeal  to  the  exarch  of  the 
diocese,  280,  280  ;  or  finally 
to  the  throne  of  Constantino- 
ple, 280,  280. 


Parish,  county  (aypotKutas)  or  in 
the  province  (iyx&plovs)  a  law 
for,  377. 

Paschal  question.     [See  Easter.] 

Paschal  fast,  when  it  should  be 
broken,  600. 

Paschasinus,  Bp.  of  Lilybseum, 
56 ;  on  the  Easter  question,  56. 

Passion,  the  salutatory,  and  how 
it  is  to  be  observed,  403. 

Paulionist,  176. 

Pelagius,  monk  and  heretic,  225, 
230,  239. 

Penalties,  by  canon:  1.  Cease  from 
his  ministry,  8,  10,  97.  2. 
Become  a  penitent,  24,  27,  64, 
65,  66,  70,  73,  74,  75,  79,  81, 
108,  110,  362,  402.  3.  Com- 
municate in  prayer  only,  29, 
31,  65,  66.  4.  Be  deposed, 
24,  36,  38,  50,  71,  108,  109, 
110,  115,  228,  229,  230,  231, 
268,  281,  362,  364,  368,  369, 
370,  371,  376,  379,  387,  388, 

391,  392,  393,  394,395,  396, 

397,  398,  399,  406,  561,  564, 

594,  595,  596,  597  seq.  5. 
His  proceedings  be  utterly 
void,  32.  6.  His  ordination 
void,  35,271.  7.  Be  corrected, 
as  a  seditious  person  by  the 
civil  power,  110.  8.  What- 
ever the  full  synod  of  the 
province  shall  determine,  117. 
9.  Ordination  shall  be  void 
and  himself  punished  by  the 
synod,  119.  10.  Subject  to 
correction,  the  holy  synod  de- 
termining what  is  right,  121. 
11.  Time  of  penance  in  propor- 
tion to  the  nature  of  the 
offence,  125.  12.  That  the 
bishop  himself  submit  to  an 
investigation  by  the  synod  of 
the  province,  121.  13.  Ex- 
communicated or  cut  off,  35, 
108,  109,  116,  129,  151,  270, 
273,  280,  282,  364,  370,  391, 

392,  393,  394,  395,  396,  397, 

398,  399,  400,  402,  405,  406, 
407,  456,  559,  561,  564,  594, 

595,  596,  597  seq.  14.  Be 
anathema,  92,  93,  94,  95,  96, 
97,  98,  99, 100, 148,  150,  172, 
206,  210,  211,  212,  213,  214, 
215,  216,  217,  230,  231,  268, 
272,  279,  284,  287,  312-16, 
318  seq.,  320,  360,  394,  404, 
448,  496,  497.  15.  Acts  de- 
clared invalid,  179.  16.  Be  de- 
graded from  their  rank,  71, 
225,  228,  231,  275,  277,  283, 
287.  17.  Brotherly  admoni- 
tion, 282, 369.  18.  Absolutely 
prohibited  from  officiating, 
278.  19.  Be  subjected  to 
canonical  censure,  273,  362. 
20.  Be  subjected  to  canonical 
penalties,  274,  388,  560.  21. 
Be  subjected  to  ecclesiastical 
penalties,  269,  284,  285.  22. 
Be  incapable  of  advancement, 
362,  363.    23.  Ejected  from 


his  peculiar  rank,  and  made 
the  last  in  his  own  rank,  368. 
24.  Cease  from  his  episcopate, 
but  discharge  the  office  of 
a  presbyter,  375,  375.  25. 
Abstain  from  all  sacerdotal 
work,  377.  26.  "Neither 
bless  nor  give  to  others  the 
Body  of  Christ,"  377.  27. 
"  Be  cut  off  for  one  week," 
377.  28.  "  Subjected  to  suit- 
able punishment,"  387.  29. 
"Subjected  to  the  penalties 
of  fornication,"  390.  30. 
' '  Fall  under  the  canon  of  seven 
years,  provided  they  openly 
separate  from  their  unlawful 
xinion,"  390.  31.  "Cut  off 
for  one  week  and  thence- 
forth let  him  learn  not  to 
think  of  himself  more  highly 
than  he  ought  to  think,"  392. 
32.  "Subjected  to  the  afflic- 
tions and  hardships  "  of  real 
exorcism,  392.  33.  "Sub- 
jected to  the  canon  of  six 
years,"  393.  34.  "  Such  books 
be  given  to  the  flames,"  394. 
35.  "  Deprived  of  his  priestly 
dignity,"  400.  36.  "Cutoff 
and  deposed,"  402.  37.  "Lose 
their  rank,"  404.  38.  Bishop 
unworthy  of  even  lay  com- 
munion in  extremis,  416,  416. 
39.  Bishop,  "must  present 
himself  before  an  assembly  of 
bishops  and  give  an  account," 
427.  40.  Be  deprived  of  com- 
munion, 426,  428.  41.  Bishop 
"must  give  account  and  de- 
fend himself  on  this  charge, 
and  lose  the  dignity  and  hon- 
our of  the  episcopate,"  432.  42. 
Cast  forth  from  the  congrega- 
tion of  the  church,  447.  43. 
Shall  be  punished,  447.  44. 
Relieved  from  office,  454.  45. 
"Brings  damnation  on  him- 
self," 456.  46.  "  Increase  the 
penalty  of  his  contumacy," 
468.  47.  Be  content  with  the 
communion  of  their  church, 
480.  48.  Bishop,  "shall  be 
anathematized  even  after  his 
death, "481.  49.  His  name  shall 
not  be  read  from  the  diptychs, 
487.  50.  "Forced  to  do  pen- 
ance," 494.  51.  "  Be  cast  out 
of  the  clergy,"  494.  52.  "  Be 
subjected  to  the  same  punish- 
ment he  devised  for   others," 

558.  53.  "  Shall  be  in  danger 
of  losing  his  degree,"  559. 
54.  "Shall  derive  no  advan- 
tage from  the  ordination  or 
promotion    thus    negotiated," 

559.  55.  "  Let  him  remain  a 
stranger  to  the  dignity  and 
responsibility  which  he  at- 
tained by  means  of  money," 
559.  56.  "  Removed  from  his 
degree,"  559.  57.  "  Deposed 
as  a  transgressor  of  the  ecclesi- 


666 


INDEX  OF   SUBJECTS 


astical  tradition,  560.  58. 
"Bishop  turned  out  from  his 
bishoprick,"  563.  59.  "Hegu- 
menos  turned  out  from  his 
monastery,"  563.  60.  Abbess 
"be  sent  away  from  her 
monastery  and  placed  in  an- 
other in  a  subordinate  posi- 
tion," 567.  61.  "  No  longer 
perform  divine  service,"  594. 

62.  ' '  Shall  cease  from  his 
function,"  608. 

Penance,  relaxations  in,  28,  63, 
73,  74,  79,  80;  money  com- 
mutation of,  28 ;  shuts  off 
from  communion,  47 ;  on  a 
presbyter,  63 ;  on  a  deacon, 
63 ;  fruits  of,  108  ;  given  in 
proportion  to  the  nature  of  the 
offence,  125  ;  on  woman  who 
married  two  brothers,  79 ;  how 
loosed  from,  80 ;  why  ended 
by  admission  to  communion, 
80  ;  can  be  shortened,  80,  80  ; 
prayer  for  those  under,  136; 
canons  regarding  those  who 
fell  away  in  persecution,  601  ; 
different,  cases  considered  and 
dealt  with,  601,  604,  605, 
606,  607,  608;  the  public  for 
sin,  25,  27,  28,  602,  604 ;  list 
for  different  mortal  sins,  25, 28, 

63,  73,  602  ;  taken  by  Alexis 
Comnenus,  27  ;  decline  of  the 
public,  27  ;  the  sacrament  of, 
27 ;  must  be  adapted  to  each 
case,  27,  28,  29,  65,  66  seq., 
125,  609  ;  for  bestial  sins,  70, 
608. 

Penitent,  shall  not  be  reconciled  by 
a  presbyter,  446,  462;  the 
viaticum  is  not  to  be  given 
without  consulting  the  bishop, 
446,  462 ;  if  the  offence  was 
public  he  is  to  be  received  with 
imposition  of  hands,  462  ;  can- 
not be  received  without  the 
bishop's  leave,  462 ;  indul- 
gence to  the  truly  penitent, 
608,  609. 

Penitentiary,  his  office  abolished 
by  Nectarius,  27  ;  in  the 
ciiurch  canon,  9. 

Penitents,  in  four  classes,  25,  26, 
31,  32,  80,  109,  147,  602,  604, 
608 ;  each  case  to  be  consid- 
ered very  carefully,  27,  29, 
65  seq.,  446,  462  ;  must  give 
evidence  of  their  penitence, 
27,29,  65,  66,  67,  125  ;  those 
who  are  indifferent  must  en- 
dure the  full  time  of  penance, 
27,  29,  64,  79 ;  indulged  with 
the  viaticum,  29,  30,  46,  65, 
79,  446  ;  prayer  for,  136,  138. 

Peut.apolis,  its  ancient  custom  to 
prevail,  15  ;  interpretation  of 
the  canon  regarding,  15,  16  ; 
had  its  own  metropolitan,  16. 

Pentecost,  the  standing  at  prayer, 
42  ;  as  a  season,  118. 

People,  to  be  taught  by  clergy 
preaching,  374,  375,  375. 


Peribolseurn,  rough  mantle  worn 
by  philosophers,  97;  worn  by 
the  Eustathians  under  pretence 
of  asceticism,  97. 

Perjurer,  how  penanced,  608;  if 
forced  to  become  such,  609. 

Persecution,  account  of,  188, 
282-283,  540  seq.,  556;  pict- 
ure of  it  in  the  canons  on  pen- 
ance, 601. 

Persia  and  its  bishops,  47. 

Peter,  Abp.  of  Alexandria,  his 
canons,  601  ;  martyrdom, 
601  n. 

Peter,  bishop,  his  complaint  is  re- 
ferred to  St.  Cyril  of  Alexan- 
dria, 615. 

Peter  Fullo,  his  addition  to  the 
Trisagion,  401 ;  was  deposed, 
401. 

Peter,  the  apostle,  as  head  of  the 
papacy,  48,  558. 

Phiala  in  a  church,  25. 

Philippopolis,  the  Eusebians  left 
Sardica  and  met  at,  435. 

Photius,  bishop  of  Constantinople, 
his  collection  of  canons,  xxxi, 
xxxii. 

Photius,  bishop  of  Tyre,  his  case 
at  Chalcedon,  277,  290,  291. 

Pictures  and  icons  of  Christ  the 
Lamb  of  God,  401  ;  question 
of  worship,  523  seq.,  525  seq., 
531. 

TTiuTiviTtpav,  excursus  on  the  words, 
232  seq. 

Pius  VIII.  approved  the  new  views 
on  usury,  37. 

Players,  are  called  thymclici,  157  ; 
are  forbidden  by  canon,  388  ; 
those  frequenting  them  are  un- 
der penalty,  388 ;  on  conver- 
sion are  not  to  be  denied,  463  ; 
no  one  is  to  draw  them  back 
to  their  playing,  474  ;  cannot 
accuse  the  clergy,  504. 

Pla}rs,  at  weddings  must  not  be 
witnessed  by  priests  or  clergy, 
157,  375,  375;  at  banquets 
must  not  be  witnessed  by  either 
of  these,  157;  their  character, 
376. 

Plotting  and  conspiring  and  band- 
ing together  are  forbidden  by 
all  laws,  281;  and  especially 
among  the  clergy  and  monks, 
281  ;  instances  of,  281. 

Poison  for  superstitious  purpose, 
74. 

Polygamy,  80 ;  how  treated  by  the 
fathers,  609. 

Pontic  bishops,  administer  only 
Pontic  matters,  176, 177;  are 
to  be  ordained  by  the  patri- 
arch of  Constantinople,  177, 
287. 

Poor,  procurator  for  the,  50;  their 
funds  managed  by  the  bishop, 
121 ;  shall  travel  with  letters 
merely  pacifical  from  the 
church,  276 ;  reason  for  their 
not  having  letters  commenda- 
tory, 276. 


Poor-house,  or  alms-house,  is  un- 
der the  bishop,  273,  273; 
ma>X*iov  or  basiliad  near  Csesa- 
rea,  273 ;  not  to  be  interfered 
with  by  foreign  clergy,  275. 

Possessed,  may  not  be  ordained  or 
pray  with  the  faithful,  599; 
when  exorcised,  shall  be  re- 
ceived to  communion  and  may 
be  ordained,  599. 

Possidius,  African  bishop,  496 ; 
received  legation  against  the 
donatists,  496. 

Prefecture,  the  great,  of  Italy, 
its  extent,  16. 

Prsesidius,  African  bishop,  496 ; 
received  legation  against  the 
donatists,  496. 

Pragmatic,  letters,  sanction,  etc., 
277;  history  and  application 
of  the  term,  277 ;  effect  of 
pragmatics  is  restricted,  277, 
278. 

Prayer,  as  a  sacrificial  act,  14, 158 ; 
standing  at,  ordered, 42 ;  kneel- 
ing at,  42;  without  oblation, 
74;  the  mystic,  85 ;  not  allowed 
in  married  persons'  houses, 
91 ;  in  private  houses  instead 
of  church  forbidden,  109 ; 
with  those  who  refuse  to  go  to 
church  forbidden,  109 ;  may 
be  said  anywhere,  158. 

Prayers,  same  service  to  be  at 
nones  and  vespers,  134 ;  for 
catechumens,  those  under  pen- 
ance, 136  ;  of  the  faithful,  the 
three,  136 ;  aloud,  or  in  silence, 
136;  Christians  may  not  join 
with  heretics  or  schismatics  in, 
149 ;  must  first  be  approved  in 
synod,  494;  and  used  by  all, 
494,  494;  but  those  contrary 
to  the  faith  are  not  to  be  used 
at  all,  494 ;  standing  at  certain 
seasons,  610. 

Preaching.     [See  Clergy.] 

Prescriptive  title,  its  limit  of  years, 
377. 

Prime,  its  origin,  134. 

Primitive  church  discipline,  25 
seq. 

Princes  ought  not  to  swear  to 
wrong  their  subjects,  606. 

Prisca,  Latin  version  of  the  Nicene 
canons,  17,  20,  45. 

Private  judgment  as  against  the 
faith,  108. 

nposipepeiv,  excursus  on,  13. 

Prosphoneticus,  326 ;  his  report  to 
the  Emperor  Constantine  Pog- 
onatus,  347. 

Prosterius,  Bp.  of  Alexandria,  56 ; 
in  the  Easter  question,  56. 

Prostrati,  prostrators,  a  class  of 
discipline,  24,  26,  27,  64,  65, 
66,  67,  70,  74,  602;  their 
place  in  church,  25. 

Protestant,  the,  teaching  on  the  eu- 
charist,  39. 

Prothesis  in  a  church,  26. 

Proverbs,  the  book  is  properly  only 
Solomonic,  591. 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


667 


Provinces,  ecclesiastical,  have  their 
privileges  confirmed  at  Nice, 
15 ;  civil  and  ecclesiastical 
distinct,  16,  277 ;  privileges 
are  changed  at  Constantinople, 
381  a.d.,  176,  177  ;  their  rela- 
tion to  dioceses,  184 ;  their  posi- 
tion when  civil  and  ecclesias- 
tical are  in  collision,  277 ; 
decreed  in  Africa  that  each 
should  be  visited  annualty  in 
a  synod,  466,  4G7 ;  probable 
nature  of  the  visitation,  467. 

Ps.  lxvii.  35,  554  ;  lxxiv.  3,  540  n.; 
c.  9,  349  ;  cxxxv,  15,  553. 

Psalmody,  ecclesiastical,  133. 

Psalms,  the  reading  is  to  be  con- 
gregational, 133,  138 ;  inter- 
spersed with  reading  a  lesson, 
133,  138;  those  composed  by 
private  individuals  may  not  be 
read  in  church,  158;  their 
recitation,  557 ;  not  all  by 
King  David,  591. 

Psalter,  must  be  committed  to 
memory  by  bishops,  556  ;  its 
general  use  and  recital  among 
clergy  and  laity,  557;  why 
called  Davidic,  591. 

Public  discipline,  excursus  on  the, 
25. 

Public  spectacles  shall  not  be 
made  at  Easter,  395. 

Pullarii,  145. 

Punishment  shall  be  only  once  for 
the  same  offence,  595. 

Quadrigesimal  fast,  32,  598. 

Quartodecimans,  56.  [See  Here- 
tics.] 

Questions  and  replies  on  practical 
difficulties,  612;  on  particular 
cases,  614. 

Quintin,  John,  professor  of  canon 
law  in  Paris,  xxxii;  his  collec- 
tions, xxxiii. 

Quodvultdeus,  bishop  of  Centuria, 
484;  accused  before  a  synod 
of  bishops,  484. 

Ravishers  of  women,  their  punish- 
ment, 287,  404;  say  they  act 
with  view  to  marriage,  287 ; 
their  aiders  or  abettors  to  be 
punished,  287  ;  whether  cler- 
gymen or  laymen,  287,  404; 
aiders  and  abettors,  how  pun- 
ished, 404. 

Reader,  133  ;  may  not  wear  the 
orarium,  143. 

Relics,  are  to  be  venerated,  533, 
534,  535,  550,  551,  552  ;  de- 
posited in  the  church  at  conse- 
cration, 560;  a  bishop's  neglect 
of  this  is  against  ecclesiastical 
traditions,  560. 

Renunciation  of  the  world  accom- 
panied with  lowliness  of  mind, 
101. 

Resurrection,  received  from  Christ, 
208;  origenistic  ideas  of,  319. 

Retaliation  and  the  lex  talionis,  184. 

Rev.  xiv.  4,  92. 


Rich,  condemned  by  the  Eusta- 
thians,  91,  101  ;  enjoying 
their  riches  with  uprightness 
and  beneficence,  101. 

Ring,  the  episcopal,  285. 

Robbery,  put  under  penance,  611. 

Roman  Correctors,  79,  92,  98,111, 
115,  116,  117,  118,  119,  131, 
141,  147,  152,  564. 

Romans,  their  study  of  law  and 
jurisprudence,  xxix  seq. 

Rome,  excursus  on  extent  of  her 
jurisdiction  over  suburbicarian 
churches,  1, 16  seq.  ;  its  extent 
considered,  15,  16,  17  ;  if  hav- 
ing patriarchal  jurisdiction 
over  the  whole  church,  16, 17, 
48,  184 ;  its  ecclesiastical 
primacy,  48,  113,  192  seq., 
246,  287;  Irenseus'  appeal  to 
its  "more  potent  principal- 
ity," 113  ;  its  relation  to  Con- 
stantinople, 178,  180,  184, 
287,  287  seq. ;  appeal  to  it  was 
not  regarded  in  the  eastern 
church,  184,  456  ;  as  the 
Apostolic  See,  192  seq.,  239, 
246 ;  Cyril  of  Alexandria's 
appeal  to  it,  192 ;  as  patriarch 
of  the  west,  274,  275,  328; 
privileges  granted  by  the 
fathers  to  the  throne  of  Old 
-  Rome,  287,  287  seq. ;  privi- 
leges granted  because  it  was 
the  royal  city,  287 ;  ranks 
next  before  Constantinople, 
287,  287  seq.  ;  her  contention 
against  Constantinople  dis- 
cussed and  settled,  292  seq., 
293  seq.  ;  the  pope's  letters 
were  examined  and  approved 
by  the  sixth  council,  328  ;  a 
l'enten  usage  in,  is  forbidden, 
391 ;  appeal  to  Julius  bishop, 
in  worthy  dispute,  417, 
417  seq.  ;  whole  question  of 
appeals  to,  417  seq.,  441,  456, 
507 ;  to  hear  an  appeal  the 
pope  can  send  presbyter  a 
latere,  419,  441  ;  appeal  from 
deposed  bishop  shall  be  heard 
benignantly,  441 ;  African 
church  was  opposed  to  the 
appeal  "  across  the  water," 
456,  456,  506 ;  proposals  of 
peace  between  the  churches  of 
Rome  and  Alexandria,  493 ; 
authority  of  the  church  as 
read  in  the  Caroline  Books, 
580  ;  relation  of  the  see  to  the 
several  ecumenical  councils, 
xii  seq.  ;  relation  to  the  first 
ecumenical  council,  xii ;  to 
the  second  council,  xii ;  to 
the  third  council,  xii ;  to 
the  fourth  council,  xiii ;  to 
the  fifth  council,  xiv ;  to  the 
sixth  council,  xiv ;  to  the  sev- 
enth council,  xiv. 

Rome,  ancient, 345  ;  new,  178 seq., 
344,  382;  old,  178  seq.,  248, 
287  seq.,  302,  317,  327,  342, 
343,  353,  382,  538,  583. 


Russian  literature  upon  eastern 
synods,  xxiii. 

Sabbath  (Saturday),  readings  to 
be  made  on,  133  ;  observances 
upon  the,  133,  148,  155,  389  ; 
observed  along-side  Sunday, 
133,  155,  389,  391;  observed 
as  a  feast,  133,  155,  389,  391, 
598 ;  Christians  must  work 
on,  and  not  judaize,  148 ; 
unites  with  Sunday  in  having 
Holy  Eucharist  in  Lent,  155, 
389,  391. 

Sacramentum  Catechumenorvm,  32. 

Sacrarium  or  sanctuary  in  a 
church,  26. 

Sacred  vessels,  140  ;  called  "  the 
Lord's  vessels,"  140;  solemnly 
carried  to  the  altar,  140. 

Sacrifice,  offering,  a  proof  of 
apostacy,  63,  67,  68;  re- 
peated acts  of,  and  relapses, 
66;  less  sin  in  a  catechumen, 
68;  to  perform  the  morning 
or  evening,  110. 

Sacrilege,  in  appropriating  church 
property,  95,  611;  in  degrad- 
ing a  bishop  to  the  ranks  of  a 
presbyter,  290;  its  guilt  and 
penance,  611. 

S.  Michael,  an  oratory  of,  150. 

Saints,  have  neglected  their  duty 
to  their  children,  98 ;  Eusta- 
thians  were  such  nar'  d^ox^v, 
101  ;  by  the  prayers  of,  170; 
their  mediation  and  interces- 
sion, 533,  534,  541,  549,  554. 

Salmon,  Dr. ,  shown  to  be  at  fault 
regarding  papal  decisions,  xiv. 

2  Sam.  vi.  13,  554. 

Sanctuary,  was  reserved  for  the 
clergy,  396 ;  according  to 
ancient  custom  the  emperor 
entered  and  made  his  offering, 
396 ;  later  kings  and  magis- 
trates had  privileges  in  it,  396. 

Sardica,  the  council  of  343  or 
344  a.d.,  411  seq.  ;  argument 
upon  the  date,  413  seq.  ;  note 
on  the  text  of  the  canons, 
414  ;  the  canons,  415  seq. ;  pre- 
sided over  by  Hosius,  bishop 
of  Corduba,  415  seq.  ;  Pope 
Julius  was  represented  by  two 
legates,  415  ;  discussion  upon 
the  appeal  to  Julius,  bishop 
of  Rome,  417  seq. ;  excursus 
on  the  other  acts  of  the  coun- 
cil, 433  seq.  ;  account  of  the 
encyclical  letter,  434 ;  also  of 
two  written  to  the  diocese  of 
Alexandria  and  Pope  Julius, 
434 ;  excursus  as  to  whether 
the  Sardican  council  was 
ecumenical,  435  seq.  ;  why 
it  was  not  ecumenical,  435. 

Schism,  setting  up  private  assem- 
blies is  forbidden,  94;  per- 
forming separate  ecclesiastical 
acts  is  forbidden,  94;  refusing 
the  consent  of  presbyter  and 
bishop,    94;  by  presbyter  or 


668 


INDEX  OF  SUBJECTS 


deacon,  despising  his  bishop 
and  raising  an  altar,  110; 
what  it  is,  110;  of  east  and 
west,  xxxiv,  169  ;  when  made 
by  a  presbyter  against  his 
bishop,  595 ;  when  made 
without  religion  or  justice, 
595;  met  by  excommunica- 
tion of  all  concerned,  595 ; 
how  caused,  604. 

Schismatics,  where  they  stood 
when  under  penance,  26  ;  how 
to  be  received  back,  47 ; 
Christians  may  not  join  in 
prayer  with,  149,  149,  150. 

Scripture  language  insufficient 
against  heresy,  3,  4. 

Scriptures,  holy,  and  the  apos- 
tolical traditions,  101 ;  read  in 
church,  108,  133,  453,  454; 
read  for  popular  edification 
and  instruction,  133 ;  the 
source  and  subject  of  preach- 
ing, 374,  375 ;  to  be  inter- 
preted by  tradition  and  the 
doctors,  374,  375  ;  called  the 
canonical,  453 ;  nothing  else 
should  be  read  in  church,  454. 

"Seal  of  the  gift  of  the  Holy 
Ghost"  in  unction,  185. 

Sebaste  in  Armenia,  the  see  of,  89. 

Secular  power,  none  is  to  interfere 
with  the  ancient  patriarchates, 
288 ;  courts  are  not  to  be 
resorted  to  by  ecclesiastics, 
449  ;  power  is  invoked  bjr  the 
Catholic  Church,  476 ;  elec- 
tion of  bishop  by,  is  null  and 
void,  557;  office  or  work 
shall  not  be  held  by  the  clergy, 
562 ;  shall  not  obtain  church 
lands  and  property,  563;  or 
the  possessions  of  the  monas- 
teries, 563. 

Secularization  of  monasteries  for- 
bidden, 284 ;  forbidden  under 
penalties  upon  those  allowing 
it,  284,  284  ;  on  seculariza- 
tion, alienation  and  sacrilege, 
284  seq. 

Secundas  of  Ptolemais  condemned 
for  heresy,  53. 

Seditious  person  corrected  by  the 
civil  power,  110. 

<re,ui5aA.?e,  none  are  to  cook,  in  honor 
of  Mary's  puerperia,  399. 

Sergius,  Bishop  of  Rome,  refused 
to  sign  the  Trullan  decrees, 
357. 

Sermon,  preached  in  church,  26, 
136;  of  the  bishop,  its  place 
in  the  liturgy,  136,  138. 

Servant-maid,  marriage  with,  is  a 
bar  to  ordination,  595. 

Service,  its  order  in  church,  403. 

Severus,  bishop  of  Masada,  had  a 
complication  in  ordaining, 
605 ;  his  complication  was 
straightened  out  by  St.  Basil, 
605. 

Sexes  and  their  dress  mixed  by  the 
Eustathians,  91,  97,  98. 

Sext,  its  origin,  134. 


She-bears,  led  about,  are  to  be 
avoided,  393,  393. 

Shields,  two  silver,  at  Rome,  had 
the  Creed  without  the  Filio- 
que,  167. 

Shows,  theatrical.  [See  Specta- 
cles.] 

Sick,  communion  of  the,  excursus 
on,  1,30;  healing  of,  professed 
by  heretics,  129  ;  to  be  baptized 
if  their  servants  show  they  had 
desired  it,  463. 

Simony,  is  forbidden  under  pen- 
alties on  all  parties,  268,  376, 
558,  567,  595,  610 ;  is  the  sell- 
ing a  grace  which  cannot  be 
sold,  268,  376,  558,  559,  610; 
may  be  in  ordination  or  in  pro- 
curing office,  268,  558,  559  ; 
penalties  for  it  are  described, 
268,  376,  595  ;  one  promoting 
simony  is  liable  to  the  penal- 
ties, 268 ;  prevailed  in  the 
Asian  diocese,  208  ;  entails  de- 
position upon  both  bishop  and 
cleric,  376,  558,  595;  may  be 
in  giving  the  communion, 
376 ;  in  the  alienation  of 
church  lands  and  property, 
563,  564;  for  reception  among 
the  clergy  or  into  a  monastery, 
567. 

Sin,  penances  for,  25  ;  mortal,  25 ; 
dealt  with  privately  before  ex- 
communication, 50,  408;  its 
stages  and  conditions,  81,  408  ; 
is  it  put  away  at  ordination  ? 
83;  the  dealing  with  sin  and 
the  sinner  with  a  view  to  a 
cure,  408. 

Singers,  the  Canonical,  sing  in 
church,  132;  go  up  into  the 
ambo,  132;  sing  from  a  book, 
132;  may  not  wear  the  ora- 
riurn,  143. 

Singing,  is  not  to  be  done  with 
shouting  in  the  churches,  398 ; 
is  psalmody  to  God,  398;  the 
modes  used  in,  398,  398  ;  in 
church  music,  398. 

Sinners,  confessed,  penanced  and 
converted,  may  have  commun- 
ion, 125,  126. 

Sins,  mortal,  in  detail,  25. 

Sister  may  live  with  clergy,  46. 

Slaves,  set  against  their  masters, 
91,  93;  forbidden  to  forsake 
their  master,  93 ;  others  for- 
bidden to  induce  them  to 
leave,  93  ;  the  evil  done  under 
pretence  of  religion,  93  ;  can- 
not be  monks  without  their 
master's  leave,  270, 599 ;  man- 
umitted before  three  witnesses 
are  free,  402 ;  or  before  two 
witnesses  are  free,  402 ;  are 
set  out  as  players,  474 ;  pub- 
lication of  the  manumissions 
is  made  in  church,  474,  483  ; 
leave  is  asked  from  the  em- 
peror for  this  publication,  483 ; 
cannot  accuse  the  clergy,  504 ; 
cannot  be  purchased  or  held 


by  Jews,  561 ;  if  freed  and 
approved  they  may  be  or- 
dained, 599 ;  were  sent  by 
their  masters  to  offer  incense, 
601  ;  in  fornication  unknown 
to  their  master,  607  ;  marrying 
without  their  master's  consent, 
are  in  fornication,  607 ;  forced 
by  their  master  are  innocent, 
607;  widowed,  perhaps  guilty 
of  no  great  crime  in  pretend- 
ing, 608. 

Sodomy,  its  penances,  604,  608. 

Soldiers,  how  they  are  to  be  dealt 
with  in  the  public  penance, 
27 ;  their  different  actions  un- 
der temptation,  27  ;  as  Chris- 
tians withdrew  from  the  mili- 
tary service,  27,  28;  sought, 
though  Christians,  readmission 
into  the  service,  28,  27;  were 
compelled  to  apostatize,  28 ; 
were  required  by  Licinius  to 
sacrifice,  28 ;  their  difficulties 
as  Christians,  28  ;  their  official 
position  was  not  unchristian, 
28 ;  might  receive  baptism, 
28  ;  their  belt  the  badge  of  of- 
fice, 28  ;  should  not  bear  arms 
against  the  enemy  at  their  own 
cost,  597 ;  question  how  far 
one  is  murderer,  605. 

Son,  His  relation  to  the  Father, 
4  seq.,  175,  176,  203  ;  as 
yevurjrbs  and  aytwrfros ,  4  seq.  ; 
as  yivrirhs  and  aytvriros,  4  seq.  ; 
Cyril's  teaching  upon  the  nat- 
ure and  relations,  201  seq., 
251  seq.;  the  incarnation  as 
stated  by  Cyril,  202  seq., 
251  seq.;  made  himself  an 
offering  for  our  salvation,  204  ; 
the  "Incarnation  of  the  Only 
Begotten  Son  of  God,"  231, 
251  seq. 

Soothsayers,  to  be  avoided  under 
penalty,  393. 

Sorcery,  74. 

Soul,  its  pre-existence  and  restora- 
tion, 318,  319,  320. 

"Spectacles"  are  forbidden  by 
canon,  388 ;  those  attending 
them  are  under  penalties, 
388;  it  is  petitioned  that  they 
be  not  allowed  on  the  Lord's 
day,  473 ;  especially  not  upon 
Low  Sunday  and  other  feast 
days,  473 ;  are  not  to  be  fre- 
quented by  bishops'  sons,  444; 
the  character  of  these  shows  or 
spectacles,  449. 

Spiritual  union,  a  dangerous  pre- 
tence, 11 ;  brothers  and  sisters, 
47. 

Sponsors  in  baptism,  47;  what 
bars,  47. 

Sponsors  shall  not  marry  their 
godchildren,  390,  390  ;  the 
penalties  due  to  such  actions, 
390;  some  reasons  assigned 
for  the  prohibition,  390. 

Standing  at  prayer,  its  symbolism, 
42. 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


669 


Steward.     [See  Clergy.] 

Stewardship  of  benefactions,  95  ; 
fidelity  or  anathema,  95. 

Strangers  must  have  letters  pacifi- 
cal,  111;  none  to  be  received 
without  such  letters,  111. 

Strangled,  flesh  of  animals  so 
killed,  92  ;  under  the  apostolic 
decision,  92,  93 ;  forbidden  by 
Pope  Gregory  III.,  93. 

SuMntroducta,  8  n.,  11  ;  forbidden 
to  all  the  clergy  on  any  plea, 
11,  46,  364;  what  she  was, 
11. 

Suburbicarian  churches  and 
Rome's  jurisdiction,  15  seq. 

Suffering  can  be  spoken  of  con- 
cerning the  Word,  211. 

Suicide,  75. 

owa£is,  crvvaycayvfi  explained,  101. 

Sunday,  its  observance  along-side 
the  Sabbath,  133,  155;  had 
the  Gospel  read,  133;  we  must 
rest  on,  as  Christians,  148  ;  the 
Lord's  Day,  148,  155,  374, 
601 ;  has  celebrations  of  Holy 
Eucharist  in  Lent,  155  ;  the 
most  important  day  for 
preaching,  374;  canon  for- 
bids kneeling  on,  403,  601  ; 
a  day  of  joy,  because  our  Lord 
rose  on  it,  601. 

Surety,  clergymen  becoming,  for 
anyone  is  liable  to  deposition, 
595. 

Swine's  flesh,  not  necessary  to  ab- 
stain from  it,  606. 

Synesius,  a  married  bishop,  52. 

Synod  (ecumenical),  the  canons  in 
force,  59  ;  those  accepting  one 
must  avoid  apostate  bishops, 
228. 

Synod  (the  great),  must  be  obeyed, 
10,  11  ;  must  have  its  canons 
obeyed,  15 ;  disobedience  to  it 
brings  forfeiture  of  office  and 
excommunication,  230. 

Synod  (the provincial),  meets  twice 
a  year,  13,  46,  48,  118,  282, 
369,  451,  596  ;  administers  its 
own  provincial  affairs,  176, 
177;  to  enquire  into  cases  of 
discipline,  13,  46,  118,  282, 
369,  596;  composed  of  the 
bishops  in  the  province,  13, 
118, 183, 282,  596;  may  revise 
and  reduce  excommunications, 
x3, 46  ;  to  be  held  before  Lent 
and  about  autumn,  13,  118, 
369,  596  ;  to  thoroughly  ex- 
amine cases,  13,596;  Trullan 
fixed  clerical  celibacy,  52  ;  let- 
ter to  the  church  of  Alexandria 
from  Nicsea,  53  seq.;  the  holy 
and  great,  53, 197 ;  receive  ap- 
peals against  bishops'  judg- 
ments, 111,  112, 113, 118, 183 ; 
receives  appeal  of  presbyter 
against  his  bishop,  111 ;  pres- 
byters, deacons,  or  laymen 
may  appeal,  111;  metropoli- 
tan invites  by  letter  to  the 
synod,  117,  479;  consists  of 


the  metropolitan  and  other 
bishops  of  the  province,  113, 
118,  182,  183;  decided  the 
causes  of  bishops,  116,  183  ; 
the  greater  synod  of  bishops, 
an  appellate  court,  114,  115, 
448  ;  their  decision  on  appeal 
is  final,  114;  on  a  doubtful 
decision,  appeal  lies  to  extra 
provincial  bishops,  115;  met- 
ropolitan calls  in  the  foreign 
bishops,  115  ;  metropolitan  in- 
vites by  letter  to  a  provincial 
synod,  117  ;  is  to  be  attended 
by  every  bishop  when  he  is 
called,  152,  282;  is  not  to  be 
avoided  in  contempt,  152, 
282,  479;  meetings  were  not 
held  and  business  was  neg- 
lected, 282 ;  two  meetings  a 
year  at  places  approved  by 
the  metropolitan,  282 ;  at  least 
one  meeting  to  be  held,  369, 
559;  disordered  by  the  incur- 
sions of  barbarians,  369,  559; 
place  of  meeting  is  to  be  fixed 
by  the  metropolitan,  369;  to 
be  attended  by  all  the  bishops 
of  the  province,  369 ;  Tripoli 
is  to  be  represented  by  one 
legate,  449 ;  powers  delegated 
to  committees  of  three  from 
each  African  province,  503, 
504 ;  careless  absentee  bishops 
are  to  be  fraternally  reproved, 
369 ;  one  each  year  became 
the  custom,  369,  451,  478, 
559;  attended  by  delegates 
from  absent  metropolitans, 
451,  451,  479 ;  at  Hippo  Regio 
in  Africa,  458 ;  to  be  held 
10  Kalendas  Septembris,  478, 
479  ;  the  primates  give  notice 
to  all  their  provincial  bishops, 
47  9 ;  as  courts  of  appeal  for 
the  bishops  and  clergy,  183, 
448;  under  the  guidance  of 
the  Spirit  of  Truth,  220; 
form  of  procedure  when  syn- 
od is  closed,  448 ;  those  declin- 
ing to  attend,  and  trusting  to 
a  crowd,  shall  be  deprived, 
467,  468. 

Synod  (provincial  or  local),  once  a 
year,  559  ;  a  prince  hindering 
its  meeting  is  to  be  excommu- 
nicated, 559;  work  for  the 
bishops  in  synod,  596. 

Synod  (diocesan),  difficulty  in  hav- 
ing regular  attendance,  13  ; 
even  ceased  to  be  held,  13 ; 
not  popular,  13. 

Synod,  Provincial  of  Ancyra, 
63  seq.;  of  Neo-Csesarea, 
78  seq.;  at  Rome,  504  a.d. , 
90;  of  Gangra,  325-381  a.d., 
81  seq. ;  of  Antioch  in  Encse- 
niis,  341  a.d.,  102  seq. 

Synod  of  archbishops,  twice  a 
year,  48. 

Synodal  letter  from  Nicoea,  53  seq. ; 
from  Constantinople,  382  a.d., 
188  seq. 


Synodical  letter  on  the  keeping  of 
Easter,  1,  53. 

Tabellarii,  145,  146. 

Tarasius,  presided  at  the  second 
Nicene  ecumenical  council, 
523,  525,  531 ;  received  certain 
bishops  back  from  Iconoclasts, 
533  seq.;  was  called  universal 
by  the  emperors,  537;  con- 
firms the  holding  of  the  sixth 
ecumenical  council,  540 ;  in- 
augurated a  new  era  in  the 
Eastern  church,  548;  was  mis- 
quoted by  the  Caroline  Books, 
581. 

Tavern,  none  of  the  clerical  order 
ought  to  enter  a,  144,  461, 
597;  may  be  used  by  the 
clergy  when  they  are  travel- 
ling, 461,  597;  or  when  they 
are  under  necessity,  597. 

Te  Deum,  135. 

Temples  and  their  officers,  145  ; 
and  their  under-officials,  145  ; 
Christian  shall  not  bring  oil  to 
heathen,  598. 

Terce,  its  origin,  134. 

Tertullian  as  a  Montanist,  128, 186. 

Testaments,  the  Old  and  New, 
396;  are  not  to  be  destroyed, 
unless  they  are  useless,  396. 

Thank  offerings,  joined  with  the 
eucharist,  378,378;  the  offer- 
ing was  separated,  378,  378  ; 
the  blessing  of  fruits  offered 
was  in  ancient  rituals,  378. 

Thearistus,  40,  44  ;  translator  of 
the  Nicsean  canons,  40. 

Theasius,  African  bishop,  480, 
509 ;  put  to  death  by  the  pa- 
gans, 495. 

Theatrical  dances  are  forbidden  by 
canon,  388;  those  frequent- 
ing them  are  under  penalties, 
388. 

Thebais  had  its  own  metropolitan, 
16. 

Theodore  Ascides,  Bp.  of  Csesarea 
in  Cappadocia,  314 ;  a  strong 
Origenist,  314. 

Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  211,  230, 
231,  234,  299,  302,  303, 
306  seq.,  512  ;  his  creed  de- 
nounced, 234;  his  teaching, 
302,  303,  306  seq.,  312,  315, 
322;  defended  by  the  Nesto- 
rian  party,  303 ;  condemned 
by  Justinian,  304;  condemned 
by  the  synod  of  553  a.d., 
306  seq.,  315;  condemned  by 
Vigilius,  322  seq. 

Theodore,  Bp.  of  Myra,  received 
back  to  Catholicism,  534. 

Theodoret,  Bp.  of  Cyprus,  225, 
299,  302. 

Theodoret,  was  condemned  553 
a.d.,  200,  300,  315  ;  misunder- 
stood Cyril  of  Alexandria,  206 ; 
his  statement  on  the  relation 
between  Christ  and  the  Holy 
Ghost,  215  seq.;  his  letters 
and  statements,  302. 


670 


INDEX   OF   SUBJECTS 


Tlieodosius,  the  emperor,  43,  55, 
130,  161,  170,  180,  181,  188, 
281,  287,  310;  convened  the 
first  council  of  Constantinople, 
170,  188,  287. 

Theodosius  II.  convened  the  coun- 
cil of  Ephesus,  196,  458,  486, 
495,  496,  503,  509,  510. 

Theodosius  the  younger  in  the 
sanctuary,  396  ;  his  legal  code, 
xxix. 

Theological  controversy,  its  value 
and  meaning,  206  seq. ;  has  a 
truth  at  issue,  207. 

Theonas  of  Marmorica  was  con- 
demned for  heresy,  53. 

Theophilus,  Bp.  of  Alexandria,  55; 
his  Easter  tables,  55 ;  his 
Prospbonesus,  613  ;  his  com- 
monitory  to  Ammon,  614. 

6cot6kos,  excursus  on,  206  seq.; 
theological  value  of  the  term, 
207  seq.  ;  the  history  of  the 
word,  208  n. ;  the  meaning  of 
the  word,  209  seq.  ;  why  best 
translated  "Mother  of  God," 
209  seq. 

Thessalonica,  importance  of  the 
city,  430. 

The  Three  Chapters,  the  point  of 
dispute,  553  a.d.,  299,  302; 
were  anathematized  by  Pope 
Vigilius,  xiv  n.,  302,  304,  322 
seq.;  history  of  the  question, 
304  seq.,  306  seq.;  Vigilius 
proposed  to  write  on  them  to 
Justinian,  304;  were  discussed 
at  the  fifth  general  council, 307; 
discussed  by  Vigilius  in  his 
letter  to  Eutychius,  321  seq. 

Thief,  how  penanced,598, 608, 611. 

Thrace,  its  bishops  are  to  be  or- 
dained by  the  Patriarch  of 
Constantinople,  177,  287. 

Thundering  Legion,  tale  of,  28. 

Thursday  in  Holy  Week,  the  time 
for  the  Catechumens  repeat- 
ing the  Creed,  134. 

Tibicines,  145. 

Timothy,  Bp.  of  Alexandria,  his 
replies  to  questions,  612. 

ITim.  iii.  2,  12,  366  n.;  vi.  1,93. 

2  Tim.  ii.  4,  375. 

Tit.  i.  6,  366  n. ;  ii.  9,  10,  93. 

2'itulus,  said  to  be  a  small  church, 
458. 

Tome  of  the  Western  Bishops,  181; 
belongs  to  the  synod  held  in 
Constantinople,  382  a.d.,  181 ; 
its  identification,  181, 182. 

Tractory,  its  significations,  480, 
486. 

Trading.     [See  Clergy.] 

Tradition,  ancient,  authoritative, 
17,  177,  374,  375,  464;  ac- 
cording to  the  traditions  of 
the  church,  101,  177;  the 
Holy  Scriptures  and  the  Apos- 
tolical traditions,  101 ;  the 
tradition  of  the  fathers,  177, 
27  3;  the  apostolic  and  patris- 
tic tradition  shall  be  followed, 
378;  list  of  unwritten  tradi- 
tions, 610. 


Translation     of     bishops.       [See 

Clergy.] 
Trial,  courts  of,  bishops,  priests, 

and  deacons,  448,  451,  452. 
Tribonian,  Roman  jurist,  engaged 

upon    the    Theodosian    Code, 

Trigamy,  80. 

Trinity,  the  doctrine  defined,  189, 
312,  332  seq.,  359,  444,533; 
defined  and  defended  at  the 
Council  of  Nice,  359,  444; 
one  of  the,  suffered,  401,  549. 

Tripoli,  to  be  represented  at  synod 
by  only  one  legate,  449  ;  im- 
portant church  centre,  449, 
466,  486,  487  ;  in  a  condition 
of  unrest,  486,  487.. 

Trisagion,  its  interpolation  pro- 
hibited, 400. 

Tunicle,  143. 

Turrianus,  editor,  43,  45. 

Tyre,  and  its  metropolitical  posi- 
tion, 277. 

Unction,  is  to  be  applied  to  con- 
verted heretics,  185;  form  of 
applying  it,  185  ;  used  at  the 
reconciliation  of  penitents, 
445,  446;  used  at  baptism, 
446. 

Uniformity  in  parishes,  42,  42. 

Union,  sought  between  Jew  and 
Gentile,  93  ;  in  Christ  is  hypo- 
static, 217. 

United  States,  ages  for  ordination 
in,  372  n. 

Universal,  a  title  objected  to  at 
Nice  II.  as  given  to  Tarasius, 
537. 

Unleavened  bread  of  the  Jews  is 
not  to  be  received  by  Chris- 
tians, 151. 

Urban,  African  bishop,  507 ;  his 
case  taken  up  by  the  bishops, 
507  ;  must  reform  himself,  be 
excommunicated,  or  be  sum- 
moned to  Rome,  508. 

Usurer,  if  he  may  be  ordained,  and 
how,  605. 

Usury,  excursus  on,  1,  36,  38  ;  en- 
tirely forbidden  to  the  clergy, 
36,  46,  49,  126,  445,  597; 
severest  discipline  upon  cleri- 
cal usurers,  36,  46,  445,  597  ; 
forms  of,  36,  38 ;  its  deceit 
and  fraud,  36;  defined,  36; 
tricks  of  the  system,  36;  rea- 
sons for  its  being  prohibited, 
36-8 ;  history  of  the  prohibi- 
tion of,  36  seq.  ;  councils  con- 
demning it,  36-8  ;  Calvin  is  au- 
thor of  its  modern  moral  code, 
37  ;  ancient  and  modern  views 
compared,  37,  38  ;  entailed  no 
penalty  upon  the  laity,  38, 
445 ;  not  a  bar  to  a  deacon's 
ordination,  38 ;  rates,  38,  369. 

Vegetable  diet,  69. 

Vegetables  shall  not  be  offered  on 

the  altar,  594. 
Vespers,  service  at,  1 34 ;  the  lueer- 

narium,  134. 


Vestments  of  the  early  church, 
excursus  on,  141-3  ;  authori- 
ties on,  141 ;  general,  univer- 
sal and  catholic  use,  141. 

Viaticum  for  the  dying,  29 ;  causes 
a  condition  of  discipline  in  a 
person  who  recovers,  29 ; 
given  under  episcopal  author- 
ity, 29;  titles  of  honor  given 
to  it,  29  ;  has  a  meaning  wider 
than  last  communion,  29  ; 
given  to  those  under  discipline, 
29,  29,  30,  46,  65,  74,  79. 

Victimarii,  145. 

Victor  of  Aquitaine,  56;  in  the 
Easter  question,  56. 

Vigil  service  in  the  early  church, 
134. 

Vigilius  the  Pope,  declined  to  at- 
tend the  Fifth  General  Coun- 
cil, 300,  303,  304  seq.;  issued 
his  "Judicatum"  and  with- 
drew it,  300,  302 ;  issued  his 
"  Constitutum,"  300,  302, 323  ; 
was  excommunicated  by  the 
African  bishops,  300 ;  ap- 
proved Ibas  and  his  letter,  300, 
301 ;  his  memory  differently  re- 
garded, 301,  304;  the  question 
of  his  letter  to  Justinian  and 
Theodora,  301,  304;  anathe- 
matized the  Three  Chapters, 
302,  304,  322  seq.;  went  to 
Constantinople,  302, 323  ;  con- 
demned  Ibas's  letter,  304 ;  his 
letter  confirming  the  Fifth 
Ecumenical  Synod,  321  seq.; 
proposed  writing  to  the  em- 
peror, 304  seq. ;  his  name 
was  erased  from  the  diptychs 
by  Justinian's  orders,  305; 
this  imperial  order  was  con- 
firmed by  the  council,  305, 
317  ;  his  letter  to  patriarch  Eu- 
tychius, 321  seq. ;  confirms  the 
four  synods,  321 ;  discusses 
the  question  of  the  Three 
Chapters,  321  seq.,  xiv,  x ; 
his  death  and  successors,  323. 

Villicus,  bailiff  of  the  church 
farms,  269. 

Virgin  Mary,  is  mother  of  God 
(0eoT($Kos),  192,  198,  205,  206, 
207,  208,  251,  254,  264,  302, 
311,  312,  313,  315,  340,  345, 
347,  359,  399,  541,  546;  was 
not  merely  8eo<p6pos,  207,  212, 
313;  her  virginity  in  His 
birth,  254,  399,  400  ;  Origen- 
istic  ideas  upon,  320;  her  in- 
tercession sought,  533,  534, 
541,554;  "  our  spotless  Lady 
the  Holy  Mother  of  God,"  533, 
541,  549 ;  the  ground  of  her 
influence  for  being  intercessor, 
534,  541. 

Virginity,  extolled  in  the  early 
church,  92  ;  its  natural  beauty, 
95,  96,  384;  not  to  be  pre- 
served in  abhorrence  of  matri- 
mony, 95,  96,  597;  accom- 
panied by  humility,  101 ; 
Virgin  Christ,  Virgin  Mary, 
367  ;  the  age  for  entering  the 


INDEX   OP   SUBJECTS 


671 


profession,    384,    503,    605; 

many  causes  may  excuse  an 
earlier  reception,  503. 
Virgins,  questions  regarding,  68, 
71, 92;  betrothed,  68 ;  must  not 
live  with  men  as  sisters,  71 ;  in 
the  church  canon,  9  ;  Eusta- 
thian,  remain  such  in  abhor- 
rence of  marriage,  91 ,  95  ;  for- 
bidden to  arrogantly  treat  the 
married,  96;  must  remain  in 
meekness  and  charity,  96  ;  for- 
bidden to  marry,  280  ;  unless 
under  the  bishop's  indulgence, 
280;  liable  to  excommunica- 
tion for  disobedience,  280 ;  are 
uot  to  be  consecrated  by  pres- 
byters, 446 ;  when  of  age  for 
reception,  are  given  to  the  bish- 
op, 462,  503  ;  or  in  the  bishop's 
absence  to  a  presbyter,  462 ; 
and  to  a  woman  of  graver  age 
for  training,  462  ;  those  leav- 
ing their  father  for  virginity 
are  to  be  commended,  463 ; 
punishment  for  carrying  off 
by  force,  558,  598,  606 ;  shall 
be  retained  by  those  who 
carry  them  off  by  violence, 
598,  606 ;  question  of  their 
marrying,  605,  606 ;  shall  be 
penanced  as  adulterers,  608. 
Vows,  their  character  and  effect, 
280. 

Wales,  church  of,  56;  its  easter 
tradition,  56. 

Wax  stolen  from  the  holy  church 
shall  be  restored  with  a  fifth 
more,  598. 

Weddings  should  be  sober  and 
modest  as  for  Christians,  156, 
157 ;  plays  at,  should  not  be 
witnessed  by  priests  or  clergy, 

157; 

Wednesday  with  its  vigil,  134. 

Weepers,  a  class  of  penitents,  25. 

West,  its  teaching  upon  the  divine 
procession,  167  ;  agrees  with 
the  east  upon  the  theological 
question,  167,  168. 

Widow  is  at  her  own  discretion, 
606;  may  marry  whom  she 
may  wish,  607. 

Widower  may  marry,  606. 

"  Widows"  spoken  of  by  S.  Paul, 
41 ;  called  presbytides,  or  fe- 
male presidents,  130  ;  honour 
and  office  given  them,  130  ;  age 
for  reception,  384,  606;  they 
and  orphans  ought  to  be  cared 
for,  421, 422 ;  widows  and  or- 
phans should  be  cared  for  by 
bishop,  422,  614;  same  as 
deaconesses,  606. 

Wife  of  a  bishop  shall  be  removed 
to  a  distant  monastery,  388 ; 
shall  be  supported  by  the 
bishop,  388 ;  may  become  a 
deaconess,  388 ;  must  leave 
her  husband  by  mutual  con- 
sent, 388 ;  of  a  soldier  is  more 
easily  pardoned  for  marriage 
in  his  absence,  607. 


Wine  is  not  to  be  abstained  from 
in  abhorrence,  597. 

Wisdom  xvi.  17,  528. 

Witnesses,  two  or  three  required 
for  conviction,  10;  cannot  be 
accusers,  or  accusers  be  wit- 
nesses, 505 ;  not  under  four- 
teen years  of  age,  505. 

Wives  were  not  to  be  put  away 
under  pretext  of  religion,  365, 
370,  371,  379;  Latins  direct 
candidates  for  diaconate  and 
presbyterate  to  renounce  their 
wives,  371 ;  the  Eastern 
church  confirms  the  marriage 
bond,  371 ;  separation  is  al- 
lowed conditionally  in  barba- 
rian churches,  379 ;  bishops, 
presbyters  and  deacons  shall 
abstain  from  their  own,  478. 

Wizards,  how  to  be  dealt  with, 
47,  604. 

Woman,  marrying  two  brothers  is 
disciplined,  79  ;  her  viaticum 
given  on  conditions,  79,  80 ; 
pregnant  ought  to  be  baptized, 
82 ;  ought  not  to  be  con- 
demned for  sleeping  with  her 
husband,  92 ;  may  not  sleep 
in  a  monastery  of  men,  387  ; 
shall  not  dress  as  a  man,  or 
man  as  a  woman,  393 ;  "  with 
the  issue  of  blood,"  600  ;  shall 
be  under  penance  for  adultery, 
606 ;  leaving  her  husband 
should  be  punished,  606; 
marrying  a  man  deserted  by 
wife,  is  a  fornicator  in  igno- 
rance, 607;  dismissed  from 
her  husband,  should  remain 
unmarried,  607 ;  married,  if 
renouncing  her  marriage,  91, 
96,  98;  have  thereby  fallen 
into  sin,  91,  96  ;  dressing  as 
men,  forbidden,  91,  97 ;  cut- 
ting her  hair  on  pretence  of 
asceticism  forbidden,  91,  99; 
on  pretence  of  asceticism,  for- 
saking her  husband  forbid- 
den, 91,  98 ;  might  be  in 
monasteries  and  rule  there, 
130  ;  may  not  teach  a  general 
audience  in  church,  130  ;  may 
not  go  to  the  altar,  153;  a 
reason  why  she  may  not,  153  ; 
ravishers,  with  aiders  or  abet- 
tors, are  to  be  punished,  287, 
606 ;  may  not  sleep  in  a  mon- 
astery of  men,  387,  567  ;  is 
not  permitted  to  speak  in 
time  of  the  liturgy,  396 ; 
may  not  sleep  in  bishops' 
houses,  567;  may  not  be  on 
the  suburban  estates  when  the 
bishop  is  there,  567;  or  on 
the  monastic  estate  when  the 
hegumenos  is  there,  567;  men- 
struous,  how  restricted,  600  ; 
ravished  by  the  barbarians 
shall  not  be  held  guilty  of  for- 
nication, 602 ;  the}'  who  steal 
women  without  violence,  606. 

Word  of  God  incarnate,  204,  206, 
207,   210  seq.,   213,  214,  216, 


217,  254  seq.,  263  seq.,  302, 
308     seq.,    331     seq.,     347; 

made  Himself  an  offering  for 
sin,  204,  216,  254;  is  united 
hypostatically  to  flesh,  210, 
210  seq.,  217,  254  seq., 
264  seq.,  312;  "one  only 
Christ  both  God  and  man  at 
the  same  time,"  210,  213, 
254  seq.,  308;  the  Divine- 
Logos,  210,  302  ;  the  union  in 
Christ  is  hypostatic,  211,  217, 
312;  results  of  the  kenosis, 
211,  212,  254;  cannot  be  the 
God  of  Christ,  or  the  Lord 
of  Christ,  213;  has  become 
our  Great  High  Priest  and 
Apostle,  216,  216  seq., 
254  seq. ;  did  not  offer  sacri- 
fice for  Himself,  216;  being 
without  sin,  He  had  no  need 
of  offering  or  sacrifice,  216, 
217 ;  was  born  of  the  holy 
Virgin,  216,  254  seq.,  263, 
312;  His  own  flesh  is  life 
giving,  217,  254;  His  life- 
giving  flesh  belongs  to  Him- 
self alone  and  truly,  217 ; 
suffered  in  the  flesh,  died, 
became  the  first  begotten  of 
the  dead,  217,  257  seq.;  is 
the  life  and  gives  life,  217  ; 
has  two  nativities,  312;  yet 
is  not  two  but  one  Christ,  312; 
nature  of  the  union  as  stated 
negatively  and  positively,  312, 
319,  322 ;  Origenistic  ideas 
upon,  318,  319,^302,  549. 
Word  of  God,  doctrine  of  the  two 
wills  in  Christ,  331  seq., 
347  seq.,  550. 


LIST  OF  WORDS  AND 
PHRASES. 

Worship,  relative  or  absolute, 
523,  548  ;  question  on,  before 
the  second  Nicene  Council, 
523  seq.,  572  seq.,  582;  of 
images,  525,  526,  572  seq.; 
irpoGKVVt]Ois  01'  Aarptia,  526, 
672  seq.,  582;  how  shaded 
off  from  divine  adoration,  527, 
539  seq.  ;  of  adoration  re- 
served to  the  supersubstantial 
and  lifegiviug  Trinity,  539 ; 
of  God  in  the  open  air,  611. 

Worship  of  the  assumed  man  with 
God  the  Word,  214;  of  the 
one  Person  assuming  and 
assumed,  214. 

Worship  of  the  early  church, 
excursus  on  the,  136-9. 

Xantippus,  senex,  bishop's  trac- 
tory,  486,  493 ;  placed  on 
committee  of  inquiry,  493 ; 
believed  to  be  Primate  Xan- 
tippus, 493. 

Xenon  for  lepers,  275,  276. 

Zonaras,  John,  the  man  and  his 
work,  xxxii. 


PRINTED   BY  JAMES   PARKER  AND   CO., 
CROWN    YARD,    OXFORD. 


l< 


\ 


